Yes, this is OT, but nonetheless: Mark W. Odette II sagte: > Totally off topic, but out of curiosity, does anyone ever refer to Cisco > or Cisco Systems in "Other" forums as Ci$co or Ci$co $ystems?
I only know this spelling with a company from Redmond, WA > > Just a pondering thought... after all everyone seems to agree that Cisco > charges the most for their products in comparison to competitors, and > that the competitors seem to have Internetwork Devices that are far > superior in capabilities or performance in many cases compared to > Cisco's gear. Who really agrees on that? There are many cases where I've seen that competitor's devices seem to be much cheaper, but are not in the end. Many bought cheaper products which were working for the anticipated environment. Later, some change in the network was needed (as is constantly the case in every medium-to-large network). The device couldn't adapt to the new environment (be it a new network protocol or a new interface type). With Cisco, you often can upgrade the devices to a very high degree (there are e.g. still many long gone Cisco 4000's in use. Even with IOS 12.1. And another point, which Cisco hammers on in its sales trainings: Cisco delivers an end-to-end solution. Sure, you can buy a better-performing Juniper M20 for less, but your network administrators will have to know exactly one environment if they buy a GSR 12k. It has the same look & feel as a 2500. And having worked with TAC multiple times, I have to say that I'm pleased to have seen mostly competent technicians there. Kudos, I know how hard such a job can be. Disclaimer: I'm not related to Cisco in any way except being CCNP and working very much with Cisco equipment (and still liking it). Sure, Cisco can improve in many areas. But I think it will -- or will fold sooner or later. Then we can talk about it again. Best regards, Oliver > > ... or is this parallelism just something perpetuated by the *nix > community? > > Just something that struck my curiosity from the subtle tone of > ill-respect to Microsoft (usually referred to as MS). > > No flames please... just an observation. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Kevin Cullimore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2002 10:49 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: need help !!! [7:49315] > > RS generally exhibits fewer instances of weird OSPF behavior than the > OS' > associated with their other enterprise products. Given the Redmond track > record of porting & severely mutating technologies from other vendors & > platforms, I'm not sure that it's necessary to look beyond corporate > boundaries to account for strange behaviour associated with M$ products, > although it would most certainly depend upon the types of anomalies > observed. Your example doesn't necessarily correlate well with observed > RS > behavior. Do you have others? > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "cebuano" > To: > Sent: 20 July 2002 9:21 pm > Subject: RE: need help !!! [7:49315] > > >> Hmmm. I wonder if the strange OSPF behavior of W2K was inherited from >> them. >> I still haven't found out why the DR and BDR roles in W2K flap like >> every 45-60 secs. At least when I tested it in a classroom > environment. >> >> Elmer >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Howard C. Berkowitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >> Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2002 9:05 PM >> To: cebuano; [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Subject: RE: need help !!! [7:49315] >> >> At 8:31 PM +0000 7/20/02, cebuano wrote: >> >Dear OSPF, >> >Your W2K server has RRAS installed by default, but you need to turn >> this >> >ON or it will not route, PERIOD. Not even between its directly >> connected >> >interfaces. W2K supports both RIPv2 and OSPF (I mean, the protocol > ;-> >> >). >> >> RRAS, incidentally, is a port of Wellfleet/Bay RS. >> >> >HTH, >> >Elmer >> > >> >-----Original Message----- >> >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf > Of >> >ospf >> >Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2002 3:15 PM >> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >Subject: need help !!! [7:49315] >> > >> >Dear group ! >> > >> > Do you guys have ever setup a Win2000 server act like a router ? > My >> >customer >> >want to connect a branch office to their head office by dial-up from > a >> >Win2000 >> >server to Cisco router. >> > >> > I have setup the connection between router and this remote server. > I >> >have >> >added route in win2000 server. But surely a server can not forward >> packets. >> > Help me pls > Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Oliver Hensel telematis Netzwerke GmbH mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Siemensstrasse 23, D-76275 Ettlingen Tel: +49 (0) 7243/5050-557, Fax: 5050-592 visit us: http://telematis.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=49371&t=49315 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
