[129032] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: PacketShader
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Andrew Kirch)
Mon Aug 23 15:25:50 2010
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2010 15:25:38 -0400
From: Andrew Kirch <trelane@trelane.net>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <4C72AD2B.8020702@bogus.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 8/23/2010 1:17 PM, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
> What it really comes down to is packets per watt or packets per dollar,
> if it's cheaper to do it this way then people will, if not BFD.
I disagree here. Core routing isn't purchased based on cost, it's
purchased based on support. People have not adopted Vayetta, or
Mikrotik or many of the other small routing platforms which are in fact
MUCH cheaper than the bridge or the tree (cisco or juniper), and the
reason is simply support.
If my router breaks beyond my ability to fix it I have a certified
engineer (of some value or other) at my site with parts to fix it within
4 hours. This is why people go with Cisco and Juniper. It's also a
mechanism of CYA. Would we rather tell our boss that the company has
responded and dropped the replacement part in the mail, or that a
technician from the router supplier is on their way and will be here
very shortly, and ooh, by the way, you did recommend redundant hardware
when the piece that broke was purchased, and it was available at a discount.
Andrew
