Flash vs Bootflash

[Salman-C]

Hi All,

What is the difference in the execution of the below boot statements for C4500-X IOS-XE software:

- boot system flash bootflash:cat4500e-universal.SPA.03.11.11.E.152-7.E11.bin

- boot system bootflash:cat4500e-universal.SPA.03.11.11.E.152-7.E11.bin

Considering both are valid & working commands.

Thanks.

[liviu.gheorghe]

Hello @Salman-C ,

I don't think there is a real difference between the two forms of the command.

The boot system flash command, I think, was the original command implemented to enable the equipment of boot from different flash filesystems.

On newer hardware, I saw that you can reference a URL to the filename located on a certain boot device.

Hope it helps.

[Leo Laohoo]

---

@liviu.gheorghe wrote:
I don't think there is a real difference between the two forms of the command.

---

If you take CSCvg37458 into consideration, there is a helluva difference between "boot system bootflash:" and "boot system flash bootflash:".  

[liviu.gheorghe]

Ok, but this is a particular situation/bug experienced in ROMmon version older than 16.9.1r.

[Leo Laohoo]

---

@liviu.gheorghe wrote:

Ok, but this is a particular situation/bug experienced in ROMmon version older than 16.9.1r.

---

No, that's the wrong assumption.  

The developers well-and-truly f*cked this up.  And there is no other way around it.  

Read this:  ISR4k/ISR1k goes into booting loop with "flash:" in boot statement

The original statement when the routers were shipped was "boot system bootflash:".  A new firmware came out in 2013 that will only accept "boot system flash bootflash:".  Hundreds of routers worldwide got hit.  

The thread was created on 23 December 2015 and CSCvg37458 was created in 17 October 2017.  That's almost 2 years apart. 

ROMMON version 16.9(1r) was released on 11 August 2018.  That's 3 years after the thread.  This is not due to "older ROMMON version".  The developers FUBAR the original code PLUS did not publicly disclose the change.  

The developers f*cked up in the code.  The developers f*cked up by quietly admitting that they never tested their releases.  The developers f*cked up the execution.  

[Leo Laohoo]

---

@Salman-C wrote:

boot system flash bootflash:​

---

As far as I remembered, "boot system flash flash:" (later became "bootflash:") was predominantly used by the Catalyst 4k and 6k.  

2k and 3k switches used "boot system flash:". 

However, when the first ASR routers started shipping (some time in 2012 or 2013), the developers decided to make it all "boot system flash bootflash:" without telling everyone nor was it documented anywhere.  Even Cisco TAC did not know about it.  The boot variable string "boot system flash:" was not accepted and saw several hundred routers go into ROMMON (reference:  CSCvg37458) after they upgraded the firmware.  

[Mancunian]

Hello,

May be is it an older syndax and explicitly calls out the type of storage (boot system flash) which is useful when working with devices that may have multiple flash storage types and can help avoid ambiguity when multiple storage types are present ( disk0, bootflash, usbflash0 )