Re: RANT Longish, Why Cisco and not ...!!! [7:19933]
What a load of cisco bigotry crap! Thank god for you guys who know better, huh? Even the folks at cisco call this nonsense "drinking the kool-aid" for gods sake. At least they don't believe their own marketing BS. Normally I wouldn't even reply to such a post, but Ive got some residual anger to vent. Do yourselves a favor and wake up to the fact that there are lots of companies out there who make gear thats just as good if not better in many cases than cisco's. What are you going to do when all your old T1 circuits are replaced by optical networks? Have you honestly looked at the market share cisco has in optical networking? Do you understand the products offered by the different vendors? I've got news for you folks, the skills you are all trying so hard to master are already yesterdays news! There is a whole new wave of networking technologies being deployed right under your noses that will totally change the way companies run their networking departments. Most enterprises in the future will outsource their MANs and WANs to managed service providers (running Nortel gear in many cases...horror of horrors) who will hand off an ethernet link at the customer premises. This will go into an L2/L3 switch, not "a router" as such (running EIGRP of course, so no other vendor's gear can be used). This will provider higher speed links at lower costs while flattening the MAN/WAN and eliminating a whole layer of storing and forwarding (read: L3 software based router). The L2/L3 LAN switching market has become so commoditized that the profit margins are slim to non-existent. The Catalyst switches are based on dated technology, and cannot deliver wire speed throughput while doing anything more than straight L2 (hence the "3-layer heirarchical model" a marketing exercise, NOT an engineering one, the whole point of switching was to flatten networks). Cisco will have to buy an established vendor (probably Extreme) in order to compete, since they've written down all the R&D they were doing along with their fledgling (CLEC) carrier business. That is why companies like Nortel are not even trying to compete in the conventional router market. Their R&D resources have all gone into next generation equipment that surpasses anything that cisco can do. Nortel's enterprise clients are buying Multiservice WAN switches, Sonet, and DWDM; NOT ROUTERS! Hint hint nudge nudge wink wink! Get it ? --- David Toalson wrote: > I work at a subsidiary of a large healthcare > company. My office is 100% > Cisco for Routers and Switches. We have a total of > 30 routers and 8 > switches. I work with 30 remote sites, a main > office and separate Data > Center. I have attached a show version from one of > our two 7505 core > routers. As you can see it has been up for over 4 > years without any > problems. Our second has been up almost 2 years. > My parent company is a > "Nortel" shop. They have to re-boot their core > router about every 45-60 > days or more offten and many of their switches on a > regular basis. Granted, > they push a lot more data through their system, but > still.. As > approximately 1/3 of my remote sites run across the > Parent company WAN a > majority of the down time I am faced with is because > of the "Nortel" > equipment. > > I don't know if this will help, but it makes me feel > better to vent a > little. Please call me if you want any more > specifics. > > CHSDCB>sh clock > 10:17:14.824 UTC Fri Sep 14 2001 > CHSDCB>sh ver > Cisco Internetwork Operating System Software > IOS (tm) GS Software (RSP-JV-M), Version 11.1(9)CA1, > EARLY DEPLOYMENT > RELEASE S > Synced to mainline version: 11.1(9) > Copyright (c) 1986-1997 by cisco Systems, Inc. > Compiled Wed 26-Mar-97 22:34 by bellb > Image text-base: 0x60010900, data-base: 0x60A0A000 > > ROM: System Bootstrap, Version 5.3.2(3.2) [kmac > 3.2], MAINTENANCE INTERIM > SOFTWE > ROM: GS Software (RSP-JV-M), Version 11.1(6), > RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1) > > CHSDCB uptime is 4 years, 23 weeks, 2 days, 14 > hours, 26 minutes > System restarted by reload at 19:50:36 UTC Fri Apr 4 > 1997 > System image file is "slot0:1119ca.bin", booted via > slot0 > > David Toalson > 816-701-4142 > > > -- > > From: chica[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Reply To: chica > > Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 8:43 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject:Why Cisco and not ...!!! > [7:19933] > > > > Hello Guys, > > > > after recovering from the shock of WTC,I just > > remembered that life still has to goes on. > > I have a quest and it is : I am due to appear on > an > > interview on Monday 17th Sep., and I have to give > a > > presentation on why cisco, and not other > competitors. > > I have to be able to convince my interviewers in > fine > > english, why(and how) cisco products(old and new), > > protocols,strategy or policy gives cisco an edge > over > > other competitors, and therefore places cisco at > the > > top most position. > > I
Re: RANT Longish, Why Cisco and not ...!!! [7:19933]
preach on brother! I would have to agree with everything you said. Like I have posted before, we were an extreme shop before we went cisco. (political BS) I have never loved a piece of gear so much than the purple packet pushers we had in house! :) Telcos are already running fiber into subdivisions and aprtmnt complexes. More and more sonet services are being deployed. And with WDM advancing like it has, serial connectivity will be a thing of the past! -Patrick >>> "Robert Hanley" 09/14/01 06:10PM >>> What a load of cisco bigotry crap! Thank god for you guys who know better, huh? Even the folks at cisco call this nonsense "drinking the kool-aid" for gods sake. At least they don't believe their own marketing BS. Normally I wouldn't even reply to such a post, but Ive got some residual anger to vent. Do yourselves a favor and wake up to the fact that there are lots of companies out there who make gear thats just as good if not better in many cases than cisco's. What are you going to do when all your old T1 circuits are replaced by optical networks? Have you honestly looked at the market share cisco has in optical networking? Do you understand the products offered by the different vendors? I've got news for you folks, the skills you are all trying so hard to master are already yesterdays news! There is a whole new wave of networking technologies being deployed right under your noses that will totally change the way companies run their networking departments. Most enterprises in the future will outsource their MANs and WANs to managed service providers (running Nortel gear in many cases...horror of horrors) who will hand off an ethernet link at the customer premises. This will go into an L2/L3 switch, not "a router" as such (running EIGRP of course, so no other vendor's gear can be used). This will provider higher speed links at lower costs while flattening the MAN/WAN and eliminating a whole layer of storing and forwarding (read: L3 software based router). The L2/L3 LAN switching market has become so commoditized that the profit margins are slim to non-existent. The Catalyst switches are based on dated technology, and cannot deliver wire speed throughput while doing anything more than straight L2 (hence the "3-layer heirarchical model" a marketing exercise, NOT an engineering one, the whole point of switching was to flatten networks). Cisco will have to buy an established vendor (probably Extreme) in order to compete, since they've written down all the R&D they were doing along with their fledgling (CLEC) carrier business. That is why companies like Nortel are not even trying to compete in the conventional router market. Their R&D resources have all gone into next generation equipment that surpasses anything that cisco can do. Nortel's enterprise clients are buying Multiservice WAN switches, Sonet, and DWDM; NOT ROUTERS! Hint hint nudge nudge wink wink! Get it ? --- David Toalson wrote: > I work at a subsidiary of a large healthcare > company. My office is 100% > Cisco for Routers and Switches. We have a total of > 30 routers and 8 > switches. I work with 30 remote sites, a main > office and separate Data > Center. I have attached a show version from one of > our two 7505 core > routers. As you can see it has been up for over 4 > years without any > problems. Our second has been up almost 2 years. > My parent company is a > "Nortel" shop. They have to re-boot their core > router about every 45-60 > days or more offten and many of their switches on a > regular basis. Granted, > they push a lot more data through their system, but > still.. As > approximately 1/3 of my remote sites run across the > Parent company WAN a > majority of the down time I am faced with is because > of the "Nortel" > equipment. > > I don't know if this will help, but it makes me feel > better to vent a > little. Please call me if you want any more > specifics. > > CHSDCB>sh clock > 10:17:14.824 UTC Fri Sep 14 2001 > CHSDCB>sh ver > Cisco Internetwork Operating System Software > IOS (tm) GS Software (RSP-JV-M), Version 11.1(9)CA1, > EARLY DEPLOYMENT > RELEASE S > Synced to mainline version: 11.1(9) > Copyright (c) 1986-1997 by cisco Systems, Inc. > Compiled Wed 26-Mar-97 22:34 by bellb > Image text-base: 0x60010900, data-base: 0x60A0A000 > > ROM: System Bootstrap, Version 5.3.2(3.2) [kmac > 3.2], MAINTENANCE INTERIM > SOFTWE > ROM: GS Software (RSP-JV-M), Version 11.1(6), > RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1) > > CHSDCB uptime is 4 years, 23 weeks, 2 days, 14 > hours, 26 minutes > System restarted by reload at 19:50:36 UTC Fri Apr 4 > 1997 > System image file is "slot0:1119ca.bin", booted via > slot0 > > David Toalson > 816-701-4142 > > > -- > > From: chica[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Reply To: chica > > Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 8:43 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject:Why Cisco and not ...!!! > [7:19933] > > > > Hello Guys, > > > > after recover
RE: RANT Longish, Why Cisco and not ...!!! [7:19933]
One of the secrets to success is to determine the Next Big Thing, and get there firstest with the mostest. I believe I have found that NBT. Chuck CIE number 4 million and 7 www.cie.com lab equipment list at http://www.cavebear.com/cavebear/catalog.html -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Robert Hanley Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 3:11 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: RANT Longish, Why Cisco and not ...!!! [7:19933] What a load of cisco bigotry crap! Thank god for you guys who know better, huh? Even the folks at cisco call this nonsense "drinking the kool-aid" for gods sake. At least they don't believe their own marketing BS. Normally I wouldn't even reply to such a post, but Ive got some residual anger to vent. Do yourselves a favor and wake up to the fact that there are lots of companies out there who make gear thats just as good if not better in many cases than cisco's. What are you going to do when all your old T1 circuits are replaced by optical networks? Have you honestly looked at the market share cisco has in optical networking? Do you understand the products offered by the different vendors? I've got news for you folks, the skills you are all trying so hard to master are already yesterdays news! There is a whole new wave of networking technologies being deployed right under your noses that will totally change the way companies run their networking departments. Most enterprises in the future will outsource their MANs and WANs to managed service providers (running Nortel gear in many cases...horror of horrors) who will hand off an ethernet link at the customer premises. This will go into an L2/L3 switch, not "a router" as such (running EIGRP of course, so no other vendor's gear can be used). This will provider higher speed links at lower costs while flattening the MAN/WAN and eliminating a whole layer of storing and forwarding (read: L3 software based router). The L2/L3 LAN switching market has become so commoditized that the profit margins are slim to non-existent. The Catalyst switches are based on dated technology, and cannot deliver wire speed throughput while doing anything more than straight L2 (hence the "3-layer heirarchical model" a marketing exercise, NOT an engineering one, the whole point of switching was to flatten networks). Cisco will have to buy an established vendor (probably Extreme) in order to compete, since they've written down all the R&D they were doing along with their fledgling (CLEC) carrier business. That is why companies like Nortel are not even trying to compete in the conventional router market. Their R&D resources have all gone into next generation equipment that surpasses anything that cisco can do. Nortel's enterprise clients are buying Multiservice WAN switches, Sonet, and DWDM; NOT ROUTERS! Hint hint nudge nudge wink wink! Get it ? --- David Toalson wrote: > I work at a subsidiary of a large healthcare > company. My office is 100% > Cisco for Routers and Switches. We have a total of > 30 routers and 8 > switches. I work with 30 remote sites, a main > office and separate Data > Center. I have attached a show version from one of > our two 7505 core > routers. As you can see it has been up for over 4 > years without any > problems. Our second has been up almost 2 years. > My parent company is a > "Nortel" shop. They have to re-boot their core > router about every 45-60 > days or more offten and many of their switches on a > regular basis. Granted, > they push a lot more data through their system, but > still.. As > approximately 1/3 of my remote sites run across the > Parent company WAN a > majority of the down time I am faced with is because > of the "Nortel" > equipment. > > I don't know if this will help, but it makes me feel > better to vent a > little. Please call me if you want any more > specifics. > > CHSDCB>sh clock > 10:17:14.824 UTC Fri Sep 14 2001 > CHSDCB>sh ver > Cisco Internetwork Operating System Software > IOS (tm) GS Software (RSP-JV-M), Version 11.1(9)CA1, > EARLY DEPLOYMENT > RELEASE S > Synced to mainline version: 11.1(9) > Copyright (c) 1986-1997 by cisco Systems, Inc. > Compiled Wed 26-Mar-97 22:34 by bellb > Image text-base: 0x60010900, data-base: 0x60A0A000 > > ROM: System Bootstrap, Version 5.3.2(3.2) [kmac > 3.2], MAINTENANCE INTERIM > SOFTWE > ROM: GS Software (RSP-JV-M), Version 11.1(6), > RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1) > > CHSDCB uptime is 4 years, 23 weeks, 2 days, 14 > hours, 26 minutes > System restarted by reload at 19:50:36 UTC Fri Apr 4 > 1997 > System image file is "slot0:1119ca.bin", booted via > slot0 > > David Toalson > 816-701-4142 > > > ---
RE: RANT Longish, Why Cisco and not ...!!! [7:19933]
oh good, we can look forward to our streets being torn up for the next umpteen years while the telcos and bypass carriers go through this again glad I telecommute. Traffic otta be real good while this goes on. Chuck -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Patrick Ramsey Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 3:32 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: RANT Longish, Why Cisco and not ...!!! [7:19933] preach on brother! I would have to agree with everything you said. Like I have posted before, we were an extreme shop before we went cisco. (political BS) I have never loved a piece of gear so much than the purple packet pushers we had in house! :) Telcos are already running fiber into subdivisions and aprtmnt complexes. More and more sonet services are being deployed. And with WDM advancing like it has, serial connectivity will be a thing of the past! -Patrick >>> "Robert Hanley" 09/14/01 06:10PM >>> What a load of cisco bigotry crap! Thank god for you guys who know better, huh? Even the folks at cisco call this nonsense "drinking the kool-aid" for gods sake. At least they don't believe their own marketing BS. Normally I wouldn't even reply to such a post, but Ive got some residual anger to vent. Do yourselves a favor and wake up to the fact that there are lots of companies out there who make gear thats just as good if not better in many cases than cisco's. What are you going to do when all your old T1 circuits are replaced by optical networks? Have you honestly looked at the market share cisco has in optical networking? Do you understand the products offered by the different vendors? I've got news for you folks, the skills you are all trying so hard to master are already yesterdays news! There is a whole new wave of networking technologies being deployed right under your noses that will totally change the way companies run their networking departments. Most enterprises in the future will outsource their MANs and WANs to managed service providers (running Nortel gear in many cases...horror of horrors) who will hand off an ethernet link at the customer premises. This will go into an L2/L3 switch, not "a router" as such (running EIGRP of course, so no other vendor's gear can be used). This will provider higher speed links at lower costs while flattening the MAN/WAN and eliminating a whole layer of storing and forwarding (read: L3 software based router). The L2/L3 LAN switching market has become so commoditized that the profit margins are slim to non-existent. The Catalyst switches are based on dated technology, and cannot deliver wire speed throughput while doing anything more than straight L2 (hence the "3-layer heirarchical model" a marketing exercise, NOT an engineering one, the whole point of switching was to flatten networks). Cisco will have to buy an established vendor (probably Extreme) in order to compete, since they've written down all the R&D they were doing along with their fledgling (CLEC) carrier business. That is why companies like Nortel are not even trying to compete in the conventional router market. Their R&D resources have all gone into next generation equipment that surpasses anything that cisco can do. Nortel's enterprise clients are buying Multiservice WAN switches, Sonet, and DWDM; NOT ROUTERS! Hint hint nudge nudge wink wink! Get it ? --- David Toalson wrote: > I work at a subsidiary of a large healthcare > company. My office is 100% > Cisco for Routers and Switches. We have a total of > 30 routers and 8 > switches. I work with 30 remote sites, a main > office and separate Data > Center. I have attached a show version from one of > our two 7505 core > routers. As you can see it has been up for over 4 > years without any > problems. Our second has been up almost 2 years. > My parent company is a > "Nortel" shop. They have to re-boot their core > router about every 45-60 > days or more offten and many of their switches on a > regular basis. Granted, > they push a lot more data through their system, but > still.. As > approximately 1/3 of my remote sites run across the > Parent company WAN a > majority of the down time I am faced with is because > of the "Nortel" > equipment. > > I don't know if this will help, but it makes me feel > better to vent a > little. Please call me if you want any more > specifics. > > CHSDCB>sh clock > 10:17:14.824 UTC Fri Sep 14 2001 > CHSDCB>sh ver > Cisco Internetwork Operating System Software > IOS (tm) GS Software (RSP-JV-M), Version 11.1(9)CA1, > EARLY DEPLOYMENT > RELEASE S > Synced to mainline version: 11.1(9) > Copyright (c) 1986-1997 by cisco Systems, Inc. > Compiled Wed 26-Mar-97 22:34 by bellb > Image text-base: 0x
Re: RANT Longish, Why Cisco and not ...!!! [7:19933]
Guys- I read your post yesterday & thought about a little overnight... I don't have a clue where you're coming from. Undoubtedly- Cisco is proud of their LFH60/ Serial interfaces (but the need still exists) & when I hear someone referring a T-1 access, I giggle picturing stoking a fire with dollar bills. Having said this, I work in one of the largest Enterprise networks in the world. We have OC- everything, a lot of Frame, DLSW projects up the wazoo (replacing mainframe X.25) & @ last count just over 12,000 Cisco routers & switches. I work in the engineering department & we deal with some pretty OK stuff. I've also worked @ a CLEC for a year & feel very comfortable with how that world lives (on their butts with a cup of coffee :o) I have been ordering DS-3's these past 2 weeks & know that a lot hasn't changed since I left the CLEC business. I say all this to qualify that I don't live & work in a vacuum. The topics you have mentioned are very valid & if you have an opportunity to look @ the past Networkers presentations, you'll get Cisco's spin on the future. I think what you brought up does represent what we are seeing (yes managed survice is getting better & available in more areas). What you are supposing though- is that Telco's are going to modernize sooner than say a Cisco can react, assuming they have no view into the future. We have H.323 because it's what we have to work with. We have MPLS because ATM circuits are what we have to work with. We have VPN's because the wide open Internet is all some companies can afford & Frame is very slow in the Southwestern areas (TouchAmerica POP's). We have NAT because of IPV4, & we have fiber going into housing developments because they were built where facilities do not exist (it's called PairGain & it's only good for phones & 144 IDSL services) Again- you've made valid points, I just don't think it's going to come upon us like a thief in the night. Phil ----- Original Message - From: "Patrick Ramsey" To: Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 6:32 PM Subject: Re: RANT Longish, Why Cisco and not ...!!! [7:19933] > preach on brother! > > I would have to agree with everything you said. Like I have posted before, > we were an extreme shop before we went cisco. (political BS) I have never > loved a piece of gear so much than the purple packet pushers we had in > house! :) > > Telcos are already running fiber into subdivisions and aprtmnt complexes. > More and more sonet services are being deployed. And with WDM advancing > like it has, serial connectivity will be a thing of the past! > > -Patrick > > >>> "Robert Hanley" 09/14/01 06:10PM >>> > What a load of cisco bigotry crap! Thank god for you > guys who know better, huh? Even the folks at cisco > call this nonsense "drinking the kool-aid" for gods > sake. At least they don't believe their own marketing > BS. Normally I wouldn't even reply to such a post, but > Ive got some residual anger to vent. > > > Do yourselves a favor and wake up to the fact that > there are lots of companies out there who make gear > thats just as good if not better in many cases than > cisco's. What are you going to do when all your old T1 > circuits are replaced by optical networks? Have you > honestly looked at the market share cisco has in > optical networking? Do you understand the products > offered by the different vendors? > > > I've got news for you folks, the skills you are all > trying so hard to master are already yesterdays news! > > > There is a whole new wave of networking technologies > being deployed right under your noses that will > totally change the way companies run their networking > departments. Most enterprises in the future will > outsource their MANs and WANs to managed service > providers (running Nortel gear in many cases...horror > of horrors) who will hand off an ethernet link at the > customer premises. This will go into an L2/L3 switch, > not "a router" as such (running EIGRP of course, so no > other vendor's gear can be used). This will provider > higher speed links at lower costs while flattening the > MAN/WAN and eliminating a whole layer of storing and > forwarding (read: L3 software based router). > > > The L2/L3 LAN switching market has become so > commoditized that the profit margins are slim to > non-existent. The Catalyst switches are based on dated > technology, and cannot deliver wire speed throughput > while doing anything more than straight L2 (hence the > "3-layer heirarchical model" a marketing exercise, NOT > an engineering one, the whole point of switching w
Re: RANT Longish, Why Cisco and not ...!!! [7:19933]
with how that world lives (on their > butts with a cup of > coffee :o) I have been ordering DS-3's these past 2 > weeks & know that a lot > hasn't changed since I left the CLEC business. I > say all this to qualify > that I don't live & work in a vacuum. > > The topics you have mentioned are very valid & if > you have an opportunity to > look @ the past Networkers presentations, you'll get > Cisco's spin on the > future. I think what you brought up does represent > what we are seeing (yes > managed survice is getting better & available in > more areas). What you are > supposing though- is that Telco's are going to > modernize sooner than say a > Cisco can react, assuming they have no view into the > future. We have H.323 > because it's what we have to work with. We have > MPLS because ATM circuits > are what we have to work with. We have VPN's > because the wide open Internet > is all some companies can afford & Frame is very > slow in the Southwestern > areas (TouchAmerica POP's). We have NAT because of > IPV4, & we have fiber > going into housing developments because they were > built where facilities do > not exist (it's called PairGain & it's only good for > phones & 144 IDSL > services) > > Again- you've made valid points, I just don't think > it's going to come upon > us like a thief in the night. > > Phil > > > - Original Message - > From: "Patrick Ramsey" > To: > Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 6:32 PM > Subject: Re: RANT Longish, Why Cisco and not ...!!! > [7:19933] > > > > preach on brother! > > > > I would have to agree with everything you said. > Like I have posted > before, > > we were an extreme shop before we went cisco. > (political BS) I have never > > loved a piece of gear so much than the purple > packet pushers we had in > > house! :) > > > > Telcos are already running fiber into subdivisions > and aprtmnt complexes. > > More and more sonet services are being deployed. > And with WDM advancing > > like it has, serial connectivity will be a thing > of the past! > > > > -Patrick > > > > >>> "Robert Hanley" 09/14/01 06:10PM >>> > > What a load of cisco bigotry crap! Thank god for > you > > guys who know better, huh? Even the folks at cisco > > call this nonsense "drinking the kool-aid" for > gods > > sake. At least they don't believe their own > marketing > > BS. Normally I wouldn't even reply to such a post, > but > > Ive got some residual anger to vent. > > > > > > Do yourselves a favor and wake up to the fact that > > there are lots of companies out there who make > gear > > thats just as good if not better in many cases > than > > cisco's. What are you going to do when all your > old T1 > > circuits are replaced by optical networks? Have > you > > honestly looked at the market share cisco has in > > optical networking? Do you understand the products > > offered by the different vendors? > > > > > > I've got news for you folks, the skills you are > all > > trying so hard to master are already yesterdays > news! > > > > > > There is a whole new wave of networking > technologies > > being deployed right under your noses that will > > totally change the way companies run their > networking > > departments. Most enterprises in the future will > > outsource their MANs and WANs to managed service > > providers (running Nortel gear in many > cases...horror > > of horrors) who will hand off an ethernet link at > the > > customer premises. This will go into an L2/L3 > switch, > > not "a router" as such (running EIGRP of course, > so no > > other vendor's gear can be used). This will > provider > > higher speed links at lower costs while flattening > the > > MAN/WAN and eliminating a whole layer of storing > and > > forwarding (read: L3 software based router). > > > > > > The L2/L3 LAN switching market has become so > > commoditized that the profit margins are slim to > > non-existent. The Catalyst switches are based on > dated > > technology, and cannot deliver wire speed > throughput > > while doing anything more than straight L2 (hence > the > > "3-layer heirarchical model" a marketing exercise, > NOT > > an engineering one, the whole point of switching > was > > to flatten networks). Cisco will hav
RE: RANT Longish, Why Cisco and not ...!!! [7:19933]
All this is very educational and almost useless to the task at hand. Many of
us are here to prepare ourselves for the toughest test we've ever taken
outside of marriage (I aint kidding folks), and have chosen this path for
several good reasons. None of which are related to the sour grapes between
Cisco and Nortel, which BTW are no different than those between Microsoft
and IBM of several years ago.
If Nortel is sponsoring an industry certification with near the widespread
esteem of Cisco's CCIE please by all means tell us what we are missing. I
can put together a Nortel lab much cheaper than a Cisco one and am all
ears.
This industry has been in constant flux since day 0 and all the claims of
mine is bigger than yours doesn't matter one wit. Personally I think Nortel
makes a good product though not as good as Cisco's overall but that's IMHO.
If they have a lead in a up and coming market segment good for them, they
need it. But don't fool yourselves it wont last never has, never will and
Cisco in particular I'm sure keeps that in mind. Sorry for the OT its been a
long week and it aint over yet as now I got to "try" and find a flight to
Houston.
Give 'em hell Dubya
Dan
{only a Cisco stock holder since 2001, but I bought at 13 :)) }
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=20069&t=19933
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RANT Longish, Why Cisco and not ...!!! [7:19933]
I wasn't going to clutter up the list and waste B/w, but you asked me to
enlighten you, and I guess the information should be available to all. Yes,
I am responding using a different email address because its convenient; but
I'm the same Robert Hanley.
If you read the thread in context I responded to someone looking for reasons
why no one should buy anything but Cisco. If my attempt to add breadth to
this persons understanding of the industry are lost on you that's
unfortunate for you. There are no sour grapes here, but I am always amazed
at the arrogant and dismissive attitudes I encounter whenever anything but
Cisco cheerleading is expressed. I participate in the list to take Cisco
exams too, which I am getting back to after being busy taking Nortel cert
tests, which were a requirement for my commissions. They were very
educational btw, and have helped me to understand many of the aspects of
Cisco's certification process in a new light. If you are only interested in
passing exams, and not in understanding the business you would participate
in, you may want to re-examine your motives.
A lab comprised of the gear I'm talking about costs millions of $ and yes
there is a cert. It is indeed esteemed, but perhaps in different circles
than you will find yourself. Oh well...
http://www.nortelnetworks.com/servsup/certification/optical_cert/index.html
The kind of change I'm talking about happens about every 10 years, even in
this very fast moving business. The last time was when two college
professors at Stanford wanted to make their department's computers talk
together. But that's another story.
Go in peace...and keep your head down.
"Dan Faulk" wrote in message
...
> All this is very educational and almost useless to the task at hand. Many
of
> us are here to prepare ourselves for the toughest test we've ever taken
> outside of marriage (I aint kidding folks), and have chosen this path for
> several good reasons. None of which are related to the sour grapes between
> Cisco and Nortel, which BTW are no different than those between Microsoft
> and IBM of several years ago.
>
> If Nortel is sponsoring an industry certification with near the widespread
> esteem of Cisco's CCIE please by all means tell us what we are missing. I
> can put together a Nortel lab much cheaper than a Cisco one and am all
> ears.
>
> This industry has been in constant flux since day 0 and all the claims of
> mine is bigger than yours doesn't matter one wit. Personally I think
Nortel
> makes a good product though not as good as Cisco's overall but that's
IMHO.
> If they have a lead in a up and coming market segment good for them, they
> need it. But don't fool yourselves it wont last never has, never will and
> Cisco in particular I'm sure keeps that in mind. Sorry for the OT its been
a
> long week and it aint over yet as now I got to "try" and find a flight to
> Houston.
>
> Give 'em hell Dubya
> Dan
> {only a Cisco stock holder since 2001, but I bought at 13 :)) }
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=20070&t=19933
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: RANT Longish, Why Cisco and not ...!!! [7:19933]
To bring this discussion to a bit more generic level, it has been determined, if my recollection of my reading is correct, that existing fiber has a theoretical bandwidth of 2.5 terabits. All that matters is the equipment attached at the endpoints. I am not familiar with what is happening at the telco level. I am seeing products being offered to customers, in which the customer premise equipment is the JDS Uniphase 1280, which on the one side connects into the carrier fiber network, and on the other hands off standard gigabit LX or SX connection to customer routers or switches. I am guessing that the connection to the carrier side is into one of the DWDM switches that Robert is talking about. the big negative I see continues to be "the last mile" which stubbornly remains twisted pair. that is a topic for another time. Chuck -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Robert Hanley Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2001 1:16 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: RANT Longish, Why Cisco and not ...!!! [7:19933] Please don't take this the wrong way, I don't mean to come off as being snotty, but you kind of make my point for me. The fact that you haven't seen it yet doesn't mean a market shift is not happening. Cisco is not going to tell you about all the DWDM deals at their major clients going to Nortel and I probably shouldn't. I am a Nortel SE BTW, but I am also a long time Cisco stockholder, since 1995. It is going to take awhile before the turnover becomes obvious to everyone, there are still many smaller cities and premises in larger cities that are not served by optical fiber. When I speak of T1 access I'm using it in a more general sense, and to say "we're doing DS-3" and even OC-3 like I said kind of makes the point. I'm talking about Gig-E between major corporate locations over DWDM right into the campus core (L3 btw no distribution layer needed), effectively extending the LAN and flattening the MAN. Multiples of Gig-E are common and soon 10Gig-E will be available. SANs are also being run over the same DWDM rings, on different lambdas. The entire Chrysler building in New York has been wired with Nortel DWDM to the floors! Cisco has already admitted that they've missed the optical boat, spin or no spin. I've been told this personally by a Cisco manager (we were out drinking one night). The ONS 15454 is the only success story they have, and it primarily sold to CLECs who were being built on Cisco vendor financing but it is an OC-48 box. Still useful in certain applications though. Many of those CLECs are no longer in business, others are hanging on by a thread. Most of the rest of the Optical products cisco can offer are OEM'd. Much of their optical R&D (such as Monterey) has been shuttered. Cisco will continue to be a major player in the networking business, and will be profitable again, probably sooner than later after this week. I do think though that their momentum has been halted after the industry changes of this last year. Rather than going end to end with one vendor most carriers will now use a combination of devices from many vendors as appropriate. You will see some applications where Cisco sells into these markets, but they will be spun by Cisco into major strategic wins; which they are usually not. Meanwhile in the past year or so, even many of Cisco's best and largest enterprise customers have installed Nortel optical DWDM rings. Nortel has become the world's largest telecommunications vendor, surpassing Lucent; and picking up most of their business. The RBOCs hold the upper hand in the telecommunications game, and they look at Cisco as the arms merchant who sold to their now largely vanquished competitors. Cisco's recent re-org was effectively a complete retrenchment back into the enterprise space and out of the carrier world. From there they wil not be nearly as able to influence the direction of those markets in the future. If you're really interested I'd recommend a little "Light Reading" Cisco Re-org http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=7645 MPLS & IP-Everywhere http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=7805 Nortel first to demo 10-Gig E (into a switch, not a router) http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=8030 Recent Nortel Wins & Announcements http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=7988 http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=7917 http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=7821 http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=7812 http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=7352 http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=7280 http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=7167 http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=7110 http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=6986 http://www.lightreading.com/
RE: RANT Longish, Why Cisco and not ...!!! [7:19933]
If I may offer, when one reads the title of the certification most of us
have or seek we should remember that it is Cisco certified. the emphasis is
on Cisco. The whole purpose of vendor certification is to provide the vendor
with a large number of people familiar with their product. this gives
potential customers more reason to commit to the vendor in question, knowing
they can easily find qualified people to service the equipment in question.
Novell certifications served to show clients that if they committed to
Netware, they would be able to hire people qualified to work on Netware
networks. Microsoft certifications served to show customers the same thing.
Sun has had a Solaris / UNIX certification program for years. These days one
can attain any number of vendor certifications.
I don't think it hurts once in a while to discuss technology in general. To
excel in this field one will need to know more than how to swap a few disks
to install Win2K or Netware. One may need to know more than a few basic IOS
commands.
JMHO
Chuck
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
Robert Hanley
Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2001 4:10 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: RANT Longish, Why Cisco and not ...!!! [7:19933]
I wasn't going to clutter up the list and waste B/w, but you asked me to
enlighten you, and I guess the information should be available to all. Yes,
I am responding using a different email address because its convenient; but
I'm the same Robert Hanley.
If you read the thread in context I responded to someone looking for reasons
why no one should buy anything but Cisco. If my attempt to add breadth to
this persons understanding of the industry are lost on you that's
unfortunate for you. There are no sour grapes here, but I am always amazed
at the arrogant and dismissive attitudes I encounter whenever anything but
Cisco cheerleading is expressed. I participate in the list to take Cisco
exams too, which I am getting back to after being busy taking Nortel cert
tests, which were a requirement for my commissions. They were very
educational btw, and have helped me to understand many of the aspects of
Cisco's certification process in a new light. If you are only interested in
passing exams, and not in understanding the business you would participate
in, you may want to re-examine your motives.
A lab comprised of the gear I'm talking about costs millions of $ and yes
there is a cert. It is indeed esteemed, but perhaps in different circles
than you will find yourself. Oh well...
http://www.nortelnetworks.com/servsup/certification/optical_cert/index.html
The kind of change I'm talking about happens about every 10 years, even in
this very fast moving business. The last time was when two college
professors at Stanford wanted to make their department's computers talk
together. But that's another story.
Go in peace...and keep your head down.
"Dan Faulk" wrote in message
...
> All this is very educational and almost useless to the task at hand. Many
of
> us are here to prepare ourselves for the toughest test we've ever taken
> outside of marriage (I aint kidding folks), and have chosen this path for
> several good reasons. None of which are related to the sour grapes between
> Cisco and Nortel, which BTW are no different than those between Microsoft
> and IBM of several years ago.
>
> If Nortel is sponsoring an industry certification with near the widespread
> esteem of Cisco's CCIE please by all means tell us what we are missing. I
> can put together a Nortel lab much cheaper than a Cisco one and am all
> ears.
>
> This industry has been in constant flux since day 0 and all the claims of
> mine is bigger than yours doesn't matter one wit. Personally I think
Nortel
> makes a good product though not as good as Cisco's overall but that's
IMHO.
> If they have a lead in a up and coming market segment good for them, they
> need it. But don't fool yourselves it wont last never has, never will and
> Cisco in particular I'm sure keeps that in mind. Sorry for the OT its been
a
> long week and it aint over yet as now I got to "try" and find a flight to
> Houston.
>
> Give 'em hell Dubya
> Dan
> {only a Cisco stock holder since 2001, but I bought at 13 :)) }
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=20073&t=19933
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RANT Longish, Why Cisco and not ...!!! [7:19933]
Chuck & group; So, all this is understood about certs & why, etc...; and anyone who has participated in this list for any length of time has seen the same ground covered as Chuck covered below. I've been following this list and participating as time permitted since about June 1999. So I know the deal. I will continue to seek Cisco certifications for two primary reasons: 1. I may need those credentials if I find myself back out in the larger job market in the future. Especially as a consultant called on both to evaluate existing networks and propose changes or upgrades be they piecemeal or forklifted, but also to write, respond to and review responses to RFPs & RFIs. All this with a view toward providing my client with an end result that best meets their needs. Regardless of what the vendors are pushing. 2. It enhances my credibility in my current role as a Nortel SE with customers when I need to critique Cisco's designs and or proposals, and my ability to understand what they may propose, and why. So there is more to this than knowing commands, though that may be critical if one wants to stay strictly "hands on". There is much more to this business, however; and I think studying the merits and weaknesses of different vendors' gear helps to round us all out, and to provide solutions to problems. Not just the Cisco way, or the Nortel way, or any one vendor's way. But the way that provides the greatest value to our clients and corporations. If we work for Cisco, or Nortel, or any vendor; it gives us an opportunity to understand our strengths and weaknesses and to provide feedback to the people who develop products to make them better. There is always room on this list for people who want to know how to solve a work related problem, or to express political opinions as has been done this past week. I think if people don't want to engage in this type of discussion they should use the Delete Key, not the "this is a Cisco List" crutch; thereby discouraging honest and constructive dialog. If you don't like it don't participate, but don't keep other people from learning something. There have also been occasions when people have asked for help interfacing Nortel and Cisco gear when I have been happy to help and will certainly continue to do so. No matter how misunderstood the gear or my intentions may be. But again, the only reason I gave the URL for the Nortel cert, was because Dan Faulk asked for it. Not that he expected there was any possible answer of any merit, or that he took a look. But maybe someone else did, and maybe it will help them to advance their career. Learning is the progressive discovery of our own ignorance. That doesn't mean we want to find out how ignorant we are. But it may mean that we need to. Go in peace...and keep your head down. "Chuck Larrieu" wrote in message ... >If I may offer, when one reads the title of the certification most of us >have or seek we should remember that it is Cisco certified. the emphasis is >on Cisco. The whole purpose of vendor certification is to provide the vendor >with a large number of people familiar with their product. this gives >potential customers more reason to commit to the vendor in question, knowing >they can easily find qualified people to service the equipment in question. > >Novell certifications served to show clients that if they committed to >Netware, they would be able to hire people qualified to work on Netware >networks. Microsoft certifications served to show customers the same thing. >Sun has had a Solaris / UNIX certification program for years. These days one >can attain any number of vendor certifications. > >I don't think it hurts once in a while to discuss technology in general. To >excel in this field one will need to know more than how to swap a few disks >to install Win2K or Netware. One may need to know more than a few basic IOS >commands. > >JMHO > >Chuck > >-Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of >Robert Hanley >Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2001 4:10 PM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: RANT Longish, Why Cisco and not ...!!! [7:19933] > > >I wasn't going to clutter up the list and waste B/w, but you asked me to >enlighten you, and I guess the information should be available to all. Yes, >I am responding using a different email address because its convenient; but >I'm the same Robert Hanley. > >If you read the thread in context I responded to someone looking for reasons >why no one should buy anything but Cisco. If my attempt to add breadth to >this persons understanding of the industry are lost on you that's >unfortunate for you. There are no sour grapes here, but I am always amazed >at the arrogant and dismissive attitudes I encounter w
RE: RANT Longish, Why Cisco and not ...!!! [7:19933]
Why Robert you have such a low opinion of a person you don't even know, trust me I'm much more pig-headed in real life. My response is in your inbox at work. Yes I did study the page you posted and now everything has become clear. But you really must have pity on me you see. I was so uneducated as to your purposes now I see that without your insight, calm humility, fairness, and understanding I would forever been awash in a sea of Cisco rah-rah happily sipping my kool-aid and toasting the gods in ignorance. Now I see the light and have been saved! Once I thought that not a single interface failure on any of my routers was a good thing, but now I see it's only Cisco obsolescence. One I thought a huge market share was a great thing, now I know its only the death rattle for Cisco. One I thought understanding IOS was cool, now I know its unnecessary and obsolete. Thanks Robert for your time and patience, would it be ok if I started a fan club? Nortel forever, Dan "Once an idiot but no more" Faulk President of the We like Nortel and think Robert is just wonderful Fan Club PS May I wash your car? End of self-serving message -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Robert Hanley Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2001 10:04 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: RANT Longish, Why Cisco and not ...!!! [7:19933] Chuck & group; So, all this is understood about certs & why, etc...; and anyone who has participated in this list for any length of time has seen the same ground covered as Chuck covered below. I've been following this list and participating as time permitted since about June 1999. So I know the deal. I will continue to seek Cisco certifications for two primary reasons: 1. I may need those credentials if I find myself back out in the larger job market in the future. Especially as a consultant called on both to evaluate existing networks and propose changes or upgrades be they piecemeal or forklifted, but also to write, respond to and review responses to RFPs & RFIs. All this with a view toward providing my client with an end result that best meets their needs. Regardless of what the vendors are pushing. 2. It enhances my credibility in my current role as a Nortel SE with customers when I need to critique Cisco's designs and or proposals, and my ability to understand what they may propose, and why. So there is more to this than knowing commands, though that may be critical if one wants to stay strictly "hands on". There is much more to this business, however; and I think studying the merits and weaknesses of different vendors' gear helps to round us all out, and to provide solutions to problems. Not just the Cisco way, or the Nortel way, or any one vendor's way. But the way that provides the greatest value to our clients and corporations. If we work for Cisco, or Nortel, or any vendor; it gives us an opportunity to understand our strengths and weaknesses and to provide feedback to the people who develop products to make them better. There is always room on this list for people who want to know how to solve a work related problem, or to express political opinions as has been done this past week. I think if people don't want to engage in this type of discussion they should use the Delete Key, not the "this is a Cisco List" crutch; thereby discouraging honest and constructive dialog. If you don't like it don't participate, but don't keep other people from learning something. There have also been occasions when people have asked for help interfacing Nortel and Cisco gear when I have been happy to help and will certainly continue to do so. No matter how misunderstood the gear or my intentions may be. But again, the only reason I gave the URL for the Nortel cert, was because Dan Faulk asked for it. Not that he expected there was any possible answer of any merit, or that he took a look. But maybe someone else did, and maybe it will help them to advance their career. Learning is the progressive discovery of our own ignorance. That doesn't mean we want to find out how ignorant we are. But it may mean that we need to. Go in peace...and keep your head down. "Chuck Larrieu" wrote in message ... >If I may offer, when one reads the title of the certification most of us >have or seek we should remember that it is Cisco certified. the emphasis is >on Cisco. The whole purpose of vendor certification is to provide the vendor >with a large number of people familiar with their product. this gives >potential customers more reason to commit to the vendor in question, knowing >they can easily find qualified people to service the equipment in question. > >Novell certifications served to show clients that if they committed to >Netware, they would be able to hire people qualified to work on Netware >networks. Microsoft certifi
Re: RE: RANT Longish, Why Cisco and not ...!!! [7:19933]
If you are anywhere near atlanta, you're already witnessing this. From one road to another...1,000's of strands being pulled. Bellsouth has the man holes open every other day. And red clay lines the sides of the streets. Like the traffic wasn't bad enough as it is! >>> "Chuck Larrieu" 09/14/01 21:15 PM >>> oh good, we can look forward to our streets being torn up for the next umpteen years while the telcos and bypass carriers go through this again glad I telecommute. Traffic otta be real good while this goes on. Chuck -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Patrick Ramsey Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 3:32 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: RANT Longish, Why Cisco and not ...!!! [7:19933] preach on brother! I would have to agree with everything you said. Like I have posted before, we were an extreme shop before we went cisco. (political BS) I have never loved a piece of gear so much than the purple packet pushers we had in house! :) Telcos are already running fiber into subdivisions and aprtmnt complexes. More and more sonet services are being deployed. And with WDM advancing like it has, serial connectivity will be a thing of the past! -Patrick >>> "Robert Hanley" 09/14/01 06:10PM >>> What a load of cisco bigotry crap! Thank god for you guys who know better, huh? Even the folks at cisco call this nonsense "drinking the kool-aid" for gods sake. At least they don't believe their own marketing BS. Normally I wouldn't even reply to such a post, but Ive got some residual anger to vent. Do yourselves a favor and wake up to the fact that there are lots of companies out there who mae gear thats just as good if not better in many cases than cisco's. What are you going to do when all your old T1 circuits are replaced by optical networks? Have you honestly looked at the market share cisco has in optical networking? Do you understand the products offered by the different vendors? I've got news for you folks, the skills you are all trying so hard to master are already yesterdays news! There is a whole new wave of networking technologies being deployed right under your noses that will totally change the way companies run their networking departments. Most enterprises in the future will outsource their MANs and WANs to managed service providers (running Nortel gear in many cases...horror of horrors) who will hand off an ethernet link at the customer premises. This will go into an L2/L3 switch, not "a router" as such (running EIGRP of course, so no other vendor's gear can be used). This will provider higher speed links at lower costs while flattening the MAN/WAN and eliminating a whole layer of storing and forwarding (read: L3 software based router). The L2/L3 LAN switching market has become so commoditized that the profit margins are slim to non-existent. The Catalyst switches are based on dated technology, and cannot deliver wire speed throughput while doing anything more than straight L2 (hence the "3-layer heirarchical model" a marketing exercise, NOT an engineering one, the whole point of switching was to flatten networks). Cisco will have to buy an established vendor (probably Extreme) in order to compete, since they've written down all the R&D they were doing along with their fledgling (CLEC) carrier business. That is why companies like Nortel are not even trying to compete in the conventional router market. Their R&D resources have all gone into next generation equipment that surpasses anything that cisco can do. Nortel's enterprise clients are buying Multiservice WAN switches, Sonet, and DWDM; NOT ROUTERS! Hint hint nudge nude wink wink! Get it ? --- David Toalson wrote: > I work at a subsidiary of a large healthcare > company. My office is 100% > Cisco for Routers and Switches. We have a total of > 30 routers and 8 > switches. I work with 30 remote sites, a main > office and separate Data > Center. I have attached a show version from one of > our two 7505 core > routers. As you can see it has been up for over 4 > years without any > problems. Our second has been up almost 2 years. > My parent company is a > "Nortel" shop. They have to re-boot their core > router about every 45-60 > days or more offten and many of their switches on a > regular basis. Granted, > they push a lot more data through their system, but > still.. As > approximately 1/3 of my remote sites run across the > Parent company WAN a > majority of the down time I am faced with is because > of the "Nortel" > equipment. > > I don't know if this will help, but it makes me feel > better to vent a > little. Please call me if you want any more > specifics. > > CHSDCB>sh clock > 10
