[c-nsp] Will UDLD work with converters ?

[Adam Armstrong]

Mark Tinka wrote:
> On Friday 02 October 2009 10:27:37 pm Justin Shore wrote:
>
>   
>> It seems to me that there should be a standards body
>> within Cisco that should mandate certain minimum
>> requirements of all product lines.  If and when there is
>> the ability for BUs and product lines to share common and
>> trivial products like SFPs then they should require it. 
>> It would save them R&D and QA money if nothing else.
>>     
>
> This is the thing I really like about "J".
>
> Across a specific series of platforms, e.g., M/T/MX, all 
> optics are shared, including SFP-to-copper modules.
>
> It's a real pity when you can no longer take such simple 
> pleasures for granted.
>
> I think Cisco's SPA technology is a step in the right 
> direction re: optical modules, since they're all shared 
> among the various platforms that support this interface 
> model, but I wonder how many of Cisco's customers will be 
> moving to the SIP/SPA format soon (and it likely won't be 
> because of common SFP/XFP sparing).
>   
SPA allows them to keep costs in the stratosphere though, nothing like 
6700 LAN cards in a SPA world...

adam.