[c-nsp] Maximizing Router capabilities

[Rodney Dunn]

I got in touch with the ASR1000 PM's. I had remembered seeing a discussion
on it.

I can see both sides of the fence on this one.

Originally what the BU really wanted was two feature sets (Base and
Advanced Enterprise Services) and they were priced accordingly.

A number of customers wanted a feature set that didn't have any
of the "legacy protocols" supported in it. Basically an image that
didn't even have the code in it that could be turned on. Therefore
the BU had to go back and restructure a bunch of their release and
test cycles to incorporate it. 

I'm sure they would have rather just had the two feature sets only
to simply the release process and testing for the platform.

Rodney


On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 10:16:03AM +0100, Dean Smith wrote:
> Given recent experience on IOS in general I suspect the difference is that 
> the Enterprise code has "no QA" and the SP has "virtually no QA"
> 
> We already have ASRs and the pricing difference is indeed there. No-one 
> could really explain it to us.
> 
> Dean
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Dirk-Jan van Helmond" <dirkjan at os3.nl>
> To: "Justin M. Streiner" <streiner at cluebyfour.org>
> Cc: <cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net>
> Sent: Monday, September 29, 2008 9:26 AM
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Maximizing Router capabilities
> 
> 
> >>On Mon, 29 Sep 2008, Ben Steele wrote:
> >>
> >>>The whole Enterprise being cheaper than base is still a bit confusing to
> >>>me
> >>>having just put an order in for a couple of ASR1002's, can anyone
> >>>explain to
> >>>me why you would buy base when enterprise is cheaper and by default the
> >>>1002
> >>>is filled to 4GB RAM?
> >>
> >>The only thing I can think of re: why providers would opt for the 
> >>advanced
> >>IP services code rather than enterprise is that the enterprise releases
> >>tend to have way more cruft than providers want.  Less cruft = fewer
> >>potential interoperability problems, security vulnerabilities, bugs of a
> >>non-security nature, etc.
> >>
> >>As for why the advanced IP services code is more expensive than
> >>enterprise, I don't know.  I'm half-inclined to say it's a typo :)
> >>I'd suggest asking your account team to justify the pricing discrepancy.
> >
> >I think they'll say it's because the SP image has better QA. (Or the Ent.
> >image has worse).
> >
> >regards,
> >Dirk
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> >https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> >archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/