[176164] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: A case against vendor-locking optical modules
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Clayton Zekelman)
Mon Nov 17 14:57:43 2014
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2014 14:57:34 -0500
To: Scott Voll <svoll.voip@gmail.com>,=?iso-8859-1?Q?J=C3=A9r=C3=B4me?=
Nicolle <jerome@ceriz.fr>
From: Clayton Zekelman <clayton@MNSi.Net>
In-Reply-To: <CAHgd+38_7D_-57D9TMKQMjm1k12wJG4vh_=YwXzh3xbtybsJVw@mail.g
mail.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
At 02:49 PM 17/11/2014, Scott Voll wrote:
>I've asked the same question and got the answer that there is a REAL BIG
>chip manufacture that was having huge system issue and told the vendor that
>they were going to rip out all the manufactures routing / switching
>equipment if they didn't get it fixed.
>
>after the manufacture send engineering staff on site they found that the
>problem was not the routers or switches but the SFP's that the Chip
>manufacture had purchased. After replacing the SFP's they had no problems.
>
I've heard that explanation a number of times in various forms. I
suspect it was an explanation crafted to counter the argument.
Regardless, it should have been simple enough to rule out the optics
with proper diagnostics and swapping out of suspect units.
The real reason of course is margin
http://www.lightreading.com/optical/optical-components/ciscos-secret-franchise/d/d-id/631651
---
Clayton Zekelman
Managed Network Systems Inc. (MNSi)
3363 Tecumseh Rd. E
Windsor, Ontario
N8W 1H4
tel. 519-985-8410
fax. 519-985-8409
