[134780] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Mon Jan 10 19:28:40 2011
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <BLU158-w22DA6A658E32C1B6CBFB82DC0E0@phx.gbl>
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 16:23:41 -0800
To: Brandon Kim <brandon.kim@brandontek.com>
Cc: nanog group <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
This is a two-edged sword.
Cisco tends to do their own thing, then, try to push their way of doing =
it onto the standards
bodies when the competition starts trying to catch up.
Other vendors tend to bring ideas that will require interoperability to =
the standards bodies
and work on getting the standard at least partially defined before =
spending effort on
implementation.
There are advantages and drawbacks to both approaches.
Owen
On Jan 10, 2011, at 2:54 PM, Brandon Kim wrote:
>=20
> To be fair to Cisco and maybe I'm way off here. But it seems they do =
come out with a way to do things first which then become a standard that
> they have to follow.
>=20
> ISL/DOT1Q
> HSRP/VRRP
> etherchannel/LACP
>=20
> Just some examples..... I'm not aware of too many other vendors that =
create their own protocol, in which they then become a standard?
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 14:46:53 -0800
>> From: sethm@rollernet.us
>> To: nanog@nanog.org
>> Subject: Re: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you?
>>=20
>> On 1/10/2011 14:32, Jeff Kell wrote:
>>> On 1/10/2011 3:20 PM, Greg Whynott wrote:
>>>> HP probably was the most helpful vendor i've dealt with in relation =
to solving/providing inter vendor interoperability solutions. they =
have PDF booklets on many things we would run into during work. for =
example, setting up STP between Cisco and HP gear, ( =
http://cdn.procurve.com/training/Manuals/ProCurve-and-Cisco-STP-Interopera=
bility.pdf ).
>>>=20
>>> Well, technically, the HP reference tells you how to convert your =
Cisco
>>> default PVST over to MST to match the HP preference.
>>>=20
>>> The handful of HP switches versus the stacks and stacks of =
production
>>> Cisco requiring conversion to suit them was "intimidating" to say =
the
>>> least :-)
>>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>> To be fair, one is Cisco proprietary while the other is IEEE 802.1Q.
>>=20
>> ~Seth
>>=20
> =20
