[134787] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Brandon Kim)
Mon Jan 10 21:26:43 2011
From: Brandon Kim <brandon.kim@brandontek.com>
To: <lorddoskias@gmail.com>, nanog group <nanog@nanog.org>
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 21:24:56 -0500
In-Reply-To: <4D2BAFB3.5020602@gmail.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Thank you for this. I find him very honest and humble. Although he didn't m=
ention Cisco=2C should I assume that
he's probably thinking about Cisco without saying it?
For anyone that has watched this=2C he has mentioned going from dual star t=
opology to an MPLS.
Perhaps one can educate me a little on how that is better off-list? It is a=
n intresting topology.
Do you guys run MPLS internally as your main topology? I was a little confu=
sed on that part....
> Date: Tue=2C 11 Jan 2011 01:17:39 +0000
> From: lorddoskias@gmail.com
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you?
>=20
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D-aECSsfd4Wk
>=20
> Watch this video=2C now=2C I know that it is essentially advertisement fr=
om=20
> brocade but the guy from ams-ix says something very interesting - "For=20
> us it is important to have a board-level relationship with the vendor=2C=
=20
> no matter who it is". So in the end this might be a factor in deciding=20
> which equipment to buy - whether your company will be able to have a=20
> higher-level relationship with your vendor so that you can expect=20
> appropriate treatment in case of emergency. With bigger company this=20
> would be harder=2C though I think the position "account manager" is=20
> essential this=2C whereas with smaller companies it is easier to build=20
> such a relationship
>=20
=
