[c-nsp] GLC-LH-SM vs SFP-GE-L

[Asbjorn Hojmark - Lists]

On Tue, 16 Nov 2010 21:21:21 +0100, you wrote:

> I have some (though not much) sympathy for Cisco's not wanting to
> support 3rd party transceivers. Hey, they have to feed their kids and
> all that. But I fail to see why they won't support their own
> transceivers. That's just plain stupid.

Support takes testing
Testing takes time
Time costs money 

... plus, given a finite amount of time, there'll always be
prioritization on what to do when. We may not always agree with the
priorities, but you shouldn't doubt that they're done.

> Oh well, we're in talks with a 3rd party provider that deliver optics
> that work without "service unsupported-transceiver" at a much lower
> price and 3 year warranty.

The problem with using Cisco-coded transceivers is that it makes it
much harder to figure out what's going on. (And yes, lots of those
pluggables that appear to work, frequently fails. Been there, seen it
many times on support cases).

There are companies producing high-quality pluggables (and sell them
at a much lower price than Cisco), but there are also lots of cases
where you get what you pay for (not very much).

If one use something else than Cisco pluggables, one should at least
use products from someone who isn't afraid to put their own name on
and in the product.

-A