[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Experience with Third-Party memory (Cisco)?
- Subject: Experience with Third-Party memory (Cisco)?
- From: boutilpj at ednet.ns.ca (Patrick Boutilier)
- Date: Thu, 08 May 2014 13:51:34 -0300
- In-reply-to: <CACTmXQUYL+zWU=YeFkDx5Mwpcktyn0tofywPREbTCKVUVE1fTg@mail.gmail.com>
- References: <CACTmXQUYL+zWU=YeFkDx5Mwpcktyn0tofywPREbTCKVUVE1fTg@mail.gmail.com>
On 05/08/2014 01:46 PM, Shawn L wrote:
> With all the talk lately about the growth in routes, I got to thinking
> about upgrading the memory in a couple of my routers.
>
> Does anyone have experience using third-party "guaranteed compatible"
> memory.
>
> With Cisco's discount it looks like I can upgrade for $5k vs $700 with
> third party memory. I'm just wondering if others have used it, and how it's
> performed, or if it isn't worth the risk.
>
> thanks
>
No direct experience with Cisco but we used to use Kingston memory in
Dell servers without any issues.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: boutilpj.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 298 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20140508/bb67a247/attachment.vcf>