[144596] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: ouch..
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mark Gauvin)
Wed Sep 14 19:37:30 2011
X-Barracuda-Envelope-From: MGauvin@dryden.ca
From: Mark Gauvin <MGauvin@dryden.ca>
To: James Jones <james@freedomnet.co.nz>
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 18:35:28 -0500
In-Reply-To: <4E713409.3080808@freedomnet.co.nz>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Nat444 or frontal labotomy hmm let's see at least with the second I =20
would still be able to make a living as a micro soft network admin;)
Sent from my iPhone
On 2011-09-14, at 6:07 PM, "James Jones" <james@freedomnet.co.nz> wrote:
> On 9/14/11 2:46 PM, Leo Bicknell wrote:
>> In a message written on Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 09:24:25AM +1200, Don =20
>> Gould wrote:
>>> How many of you have sat and thought about the merit of this web =20
>>> site?
>> Ok, I'll take a swing at your list...
>>
>>> * Does Juniper break promises?
>> Yes.
>>
>>> * Does Cisco break them?
>> Yes.
>>
>>> * What bad things and experiences have you had with Cisco, Juniper?
>> It might take me several days, and many pages to compile that list.
>>
>>> * What is the best technology for each company?
>> Cisco: The AGS+ was ahead of its time.
>> Jiniper: The Olive is quite nifty.
>>
>>> * Did you know that Cisco has a 100Gb solution?
>> Yes, but I can't afford it.
>>
>> Now, with that out of the way, how much does everyone else hate =20
>> even the
>> thought of NAT444?
>>
>> :) :) :)
>>
>
> Just the thought of NAT444 makes my stomach turn.
>
>
>
