On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 7:00 AM, Jared Mauch <ja...@puck.nether.net> wrote: > > On Nov 17, 2010, at 6:27 AM, Tim Durack wrote: > >> The issue of SFP compatibility has driven me up the wall and around >> the bend. Vendors will not change their anti-competitive behavior >> without external force. An external force I can apply, is money. So >> buy SFPs from OEM and instruct them to code the SFP as needed (they >> are making the SFPs for VendorC/J/H anyway.) There are plenty of >> companies who will do it, and they make a decent product. You may have >> to carry the burden of "testing" the SFPs. > > I'm talking about Cisco sold optics. > > Cisco doesn't support their own optics that they sell. And I'm not talking > about the 100M-FX stuff that doesn't work because the ethernet framer isn't > gig+100, or 10/100/1000. > > This isn't the issue of 3rd party optics coded as Cisco, but more that they > have a warehouse of equipment that doesn't interoperate with itself that they > keep shoveling out at the community.
Point taken. Cisco BUs might as well be competing companies. -- Tim:> _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
