[c-nsp] Green Cisco

[Justin Shore]

Seth Mattinen wrote:
> Don't forget "HP ships piece of paper in padded box".
> 
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/07/18/hp_packaging/

So does Cisco.  When we placed a large order 2 years ago I received to 
identical packages from Singapore (some sort of Air parcel company). 
Inside each box was 2 layers of pink foam padding.  Between the foam was 
2 sheets of legalese license disclaimer crap.  It wasn't a serial #, 
license key, PAK, etc.  It was just more crap to throw away.  The other 
box had identical contents.  They were shipped out on the same day.  In 
fact if memory serves me correctly they had consecutive tracking and way 
bill numbers.  I felt special.

We bought a large quantity of Champion SFPs for a non-Cisco project. 
They were shipped packed in sheets of molded anti-static plastic that 
contains spots for about a dozen SFPs.  These were packed in anti-static 
boxes of 4-5 layers of plastic.  No paper crap to through away.  No 
static bags to cut open and then trash.  Nice and neat.  Other vendors I 
won't name here place them in a padded cardboard box the size of a 
typical pocket knife.  When I bought several dozen Cisco SFPs a few 
years back each SFP was in a static bag.  The static bag was in a large 
Ziploc of sorts that also contained several sheets of paper (install 
info, legalese crap).  For a short time I actually bothered to open each 
plastic bag and remove each static bag and paper.  The paper went into 
one recycling pile and the plastic bag into another.  That didn't last 
long.  I gave up on that waste of time and started slicing the plastic 
bags open with my knife to get to the static bag.  Then tossed the rest 
in the trash.  Same goes for switches and routers.  I trash every piece 
of paper in the box.

Their shipping and packing methodologies are less than green.  The least 
they could do is give us a part number to exclude the crap.  We have the 
"=" part numbers for spares.  How about a "-" part number for green 
packing?  One would think that it would save Cisco reasonable sums of 
money too which I'm sure they'd like to do in these rougher times.

Justin