[c-nsp] can someone from Cisco enlighten Steve and the rest of us?

[Richard Golodner]

On Mon, 2009-09-21 at 00:26 -0400, Steve Fischer wrote:
> This would be more acceptable (at least to me), were this an issue
> with a
> 3560 switch, or a 2800 series router, but this was 2 core switches of
> their
> flagship product, the 6500.  Enterprise data centers throughout the
> US. Like
> the one at my organization, rely heavily on this product, and it
> should be
> supported as such.  I understand the problem, but given the
> criticality of
> these devices as they relate to the core infrastructure of so many
> organizations, transferring the call to India is not an acceptable way
> of
> dealing with it. 
	Steve, I agree completely. I see some of the C-NSP posters don't even
deal with TAC other than by email. 
	It is a shame when a company asks the price they do for not only the
hardware and software of the device, but the paid support should be
useful and effective.
	I think it might be time that Cisco reexamine their outsourcing of
support for mission critical hardware. I have spoken to some very bright
people not only at Cisco, but Watchguard and a few other vendors whose
support is India based. These are smart men and women, we just need to
be able to understand what is being said on the other end of the phone,
which is often complicated by the fact that I am on speakerphone.
	Cisco should be made aware of this in every way possible as long as it
is constructive for the community. 
	I applaud your patience and fortitude and I also know I would probably
have not handled the situation as coolly as you did. Sorry you had to
deal with this. 
	Hopefully, as a result of your experience Cisco will work to improve
how these network down emergencies are handled.
	Sincerely, Richard