[133251] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Lightning Debates at NANOG 51
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Tom Daly)
Tue Dec 7 15:40:54 2010
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2010 15:40:48 -0500 (EST)
From: Tom Daly <tom@dyn.com>
To: George Bonser <gbonser@seven.com>
In-Reply-To: <5A6D953473350C4B9995546AFE9939EE0B14CDAA@RWC-EX1.corp.seven.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org, Greg Whynott <Greg.Whynott@oicr.on.ca>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
> In most cases it isn't an option, you use what the hardware uses. I
> can't decide to use an SFP+ in a unit with XFP form factor. I select
> the hardware according to the features I need and then buy the optics
> it requires, I don't select the hardware based on the optics modules
> it uses. The only drawback I have seen so far is finding ER optics in
> SFP+ form factor but they might be available now (I couldn't find them
> a year or so ago).
George,
Good point. Perhaps the context should be more nebulous? Given a choice in an ideal word, not limited by the selection of hardware manufactures, which do you prefer? ras did a good talk on optics in the past, I'm sure there's some points to discuss.
> A good topic might be ipv6 migration strategies: dual stack or native
> v6 with nat64/dns64
Alright, added. Are you volunteering to speak to one point or the other?
Thanks,
Tom
