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

[Gert Doering]

Hi,

On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 04:26:14PM +0800, Mark Tinka wrote:
> Glad we never did buy these platforms. I'd be kicking myself 
> right about now.

Given the alternatives at the time, I still think we go the right choice
- "lots of port, lots of forwarding power, affordable price".  We knew
that there were hardware limitations (VLAN space, netflow/tcp flags) but
the alternatives - GSR, CRS-1, Juniper M-Series - would have been 
very much unaffordable for the number of GE ports we wanted to have 
there.

The thing that really sucks about 6500/7600 is the BU politics, and 
splitting development resources to make "two half-heartedly supported 
platforms" out of "one great one".

For the next round of purchases, I'm not sure what we'll end up at.  All
"real routers" from $C tend to be a bit on the expensive side of things,
so we might go for "just a switch" from $J - the MXes really look 
promising... and less politics there.

gert
-- 
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
                                                           //www.muc.de/~gert/
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany                             gert at greenie.muc.de
fax: +49-89-35655025                        gert at net.informatik.tu-muenchen.de
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 305 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/attachments/20101119/d2457b1d/attachment.bin>