Some overworked, under-paid college kid with nothing but time on his hands
to learn all this stuff and thirst for it that leaves him with a list or
certifications as long as my arm... I run into these kids every day in the
field. My hat's off to 'em! They forge new ground, but sooner or later they
all yearn for the simplicity of a single-vendor, end-to-end solution. Once
you get to that place in the road where you find yourself looking at a wife
and two kids, the "How can I break it and rebuild it!" attitude changes to
"This one's broken, give me another one..."
Z
>From: "Howard C. Berkowitz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: "Howard C. Berkowitz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: alternative to Cisco routers
>Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 21:34:15 -0500
>
> >This is all well and good for the big time players, ISPs, big corps
> >yadda yadda yadda, and companies with cash to burn like so much old
>toilet
> >paper. The Small and Midsized Business market (SMB) almost always can
> >accomplish what they want with free Unix or Linux for layer 3 and
> >cheap stackable switches with or without 802.1q support.
> >
> >So my obligatory cisco alternative:
> >www.zebra.org
>
>And, in a non-information technology related SMB, who installs and supports
>it?
>
> >
> >On Tue, Feb 13, 2001 at 04:00:36PM -0600, William E. Gragido wrote:
> >>There ServerIronXL Layer 4-7 switches are pretty cool boxes as well.
> >>Foundry is also pretty nice in that their command line interface is
>awfully
> >>reminiscent of Cisco's. The transition from one to the other should not
>be
> >>too difficult.
> >>
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: Christopher Kolp [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >>Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 3:41 PM
> >>To: 'Brant Stevens'; 'William E. Gragido'; 'Howard C. Berkowitz';
> >>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>Subject: RE: alternative to Cisco routers
> >>
> >>
> >>Foundry prices are killer and the performance is top notch.
> >>
> >>We're planning a roll out with 40 OC-12 POS. Guess who our preferred
> >>provider is?
> >>
> >>None other than foundry.
> >>
> >>-ck
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> >>Brant Stevens
> >>Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 4:28 PM
> >>To: William E. Gragido; 'Howard C. Berkowitz'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>Subject: RE: alternative to Cisco routers
> >>
> >>
> >>Not to mention Foundry...
> >>
> >>Brant I. Stevens
> >>Internetwork Solutions Engineer
> >>Thrupoint, Inc.
> >>545 Fifth Avenue, 14th Floor
> >>New York, NY. 10017
> >>646-562-6540
> >>
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> >>William E. Gragido
> >>Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 2:47 PM
> >>To: 'Howard C. Berkowitz'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>Subject: RE: alternative to Cisco routers
> >>
> >>
> >>Riding on the coat tails of Howard's comments, there are also other
>players
> >>out there like Lucent(home of the Nexibit N64000 Terabit Switch Router
>and
> >>the Ascend product lines), Avici, Charlette's Web, Nortel etc., that
>offer
> >>carrier grade solutions.
> >>
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> >>Howard C. Berkowitz
> >>Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 1:20 PM
> >>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>Subject: Re: alternative to Cisco routers
> >>
> >>
> >>A few comments, in which I think I am being reasonably objective.
> >>
> >>On this list, people periodically speak of the joys of Cisco, because
> >>it offers end-to-end solutions. That is a very enterprise-oriented
> >>view.
> >>
> >>Much more than in the enterprise space, carriers/ISPs tend to _want_
> >>multivendor solutions. There are several reasons. They are
> >>protected, to some extent, from bugs in the hardware or software of a
> >>specific implementation. Next, if they have several qualified
> >>vendors, they can get some protection against delivery backlogs from
> >>one of them. The larger provider also can play competitive discount
> >>and service games with the vendors.
> >>
> >>In this market, Juniper has the advantage of having built a product
> >>as carrier-oriented from the ground up. There's a lot of bloat in IOS
> >>due to the perception or need for legacy, usually
> >>enterprise-oriented, features. Independent reviewers, such as the
> >>Tolly group, have indicated that Junipers may have as good or better
> >>throughput than equivalent Cisco products.
> >>
> >>No one vendor owns the entire carrier router space. Cisco's
> >>advertising that ninety-some percent of the traffic in the internet
> >>goes over the equipment of one company doesn't necessarily mean the
> >>core bandwidth, but that the traffic at some point hits an enterprise
> >>or carrier Cisco device. In any case, I prefer the variant of this
> >>slogan I saw in someone's .sig (hoping I don't hit a filter)
> >>"ninety-some percent of the p*rn*graphy in the Internet goes through
> >>the equipment of one company." Said comment could be equally true of
> > >Cisco's routers or Nortel's optics.
> >>
> >>Juniper and Cisco both make fine products.
> >>
> >>
> >>>John,
> >>>
> >>>I went to a BGP study session and the instructor said that major ISP
>use
> >>>Juniper router to run BGP. Hope this help. PEACE
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Raheem
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>From: John Chambers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>>>Reply-To: John Chambers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>>>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>>>Subject: alternative to Cisco routers
> >>>>Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 08:09:59 -0500
> >>>>
> >>>>Anyone who have experience with Juniper routers would like to comment
>on
> >>>>its performance (M20 and 40
> >>>>series) in comparison to Cisco GSR 12000s. My company is in the
>process
> >>>>of evaluating Juniper products
> >>>>because we are not very happy with Cisco performance. Our router
> >>>>crashes almost every week which is
> >>>>unacceptable and Cisco didn't provide much help other than giving us
> >>> >buggy IOS code.
> >>>>
> >>
> >>_________________________________
> >>FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
> >>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> >>Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>
> >>_________________________________
> >>FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
> >>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> >>Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>
> >>_________________________________
> >>FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
> >>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> >>Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>
> >>_________________________________
> >>FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
> >>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> >>Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >_________________________________________________________
> >Do You Yahoo!?
> >Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
> >
> >
> >_________________________________
> >FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
> >http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> >Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>_________________________________
>FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
>Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
_________________________________
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
