[179815] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Alcatel-Lucent 7750 Service Router (SR)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Watson, Bob)
Fri May 8 02:03:31 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: "Watson, Bob" <Bob.Watson@wwt.com>
To: Josh Reynolds <josh@spitwspots.com>
Date: Fri, 8 May 2015 06:03:13 +0000
In-Reply-To: <554C1419.8060006@spitwspots.com>
Cc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>, Rob Seastrom <rs@seastrom.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Carrier oem churn (turnover /agitation cycles)
First mover for features happen and leapfrog but the ones that matter get a=
dopted across the line in time. =20
> On May 7, 2015, at 8:40 PM, Josh Reynolds <josh@spitwspots.com> wrote:
>=20
> What churn rates are you talking about?
>=20
> Josh Reynolds
> CIO, SPITwSPOTS
> www.spitwspots.com
>=20
>> On 05/07/2015 05:36 PM, Watson, Bob wrote:
>> Many of these churn rates result from problems self inflicted hence all=
the dramatic sdn promises, popularity in abstractions, Api all the things,=
let's go yang/netconf and retrofit every ietf standard. There's benefits =
but gotta rant a little. What's better than correct? Well over correct of =
course.
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>>> On May 7, 2015, at 12:17 PM, Josh Reynolds <josh@spitwspots.com> wrote:
>>>=20
>>> You know where these people wouldn't fit? W/ISPs.
>>>=20
>>> Every three years or so you are forklifting the majority of your wirele=
ss PtMP for either a new series or a totally different vendor. New backhaul=
vendors often. You're building AC and DC power plants. You likely touch Ci=
sco, juniper, HP, mikrotik, ubiquiti, Linux, windows, *BSD/pfsense, lucent,=
accedian/ciena, etc due to various client and network requirements all in =
the same week, AND you have to make them work together nicely :)
>>>=20
>>> It's not the environment for somebody like that, and I truly don't unde=
rstand how people of that.. "caliber" end up working on large scale WANs an=
d global transit networks.
>>>=20
>>> Frankly, it scares me a bit.
>>>=20
>>>> On May 7, 2015 9:07:35 AM AKDT, Craig <cvuljanic@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> we do "cry" when we interview people that claim to have "advanced
>>>> knowledge" of BGP and we ask them some very basic BGP questions, and w=
e
>>>> get
>>>> a blank stare.....
>>>>=20
>>>> On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 12:49 PM, Rob Seastrom <rs@seastrom.com> wrote:
>>>>=20
>>>>> Josh Reynolds <josh@spitwspots.com> writes:
>>>>>=20
>>>>>> It really bothers me to see that people in this industry are so
>>>>>> worried about a change of syntax or terminology. If there's one
>>>>>> thing about the big vendors that bothers me, it's that these
>>>>>> batteries of vendor specific tests have allowed many "techs" to get
>>>>>> lazy. They simply can't seem to operate well, if at all, in a
>>>>>> non-Cisco (primarily) environment.
>>>>> If that bothers you, I recommend you not look at what passes for a
>>>>> "system administrator" these days. It will make you cry.
>>>>>=20
>>>>> -r
>>> --=20
>>> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>=20
