[2204] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: cisco OC3 interfaces
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Carl Payne)
Fri Mar 22 03:04:31 1996
From: cpayne@fiber.net (Carl Payne)
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 96 00:55:33
To: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <199603220632.WAA13395@diablo.cisco.com>
>We've certainly been known to do some pretty silly things before, and
>some would say that a lot of things we're doing now are pretty silly :-)
My favorite silly thing is having both shoes drop within a week.
Dave (and Dave), I know I'm not a party to this little tension, but I just
can't help myself. I've gotta post.
>Regardless, an non-disclosure agreement is a non-disclosure agreement.
IMHO, you did much more damage with your original post, dated the 19th (?)
which said:
>If anyone has been discussing other OC3 interfaces with you, they
>are potentially in violation of a non-disclosure agreement, and I
>would suggest that such conversations shouldn't be happening.
To me, this SCREAMS: "There will be an OC3 interface for the 4700 NLT
Christmas, maybe sooner."
Oh, I get it. First, exploit someone else's mistake, then make a
follow-up post to a newsgroup (or auto-CC?) to iron the point home just in
case nobody caught the faux pas the first time around. Yeah, that's
marketing, right? My mistake.
Don't get me wrong, Dave, I have no disrespect for you (you've helped me
before), and obviously I buy Cisco...a LOT. But sometimes...
I just wanted you to know: we're listening. That way, you won't have to
post a note that says, "I mean, if we WERE to have an OC3 interface for a
non-7xxx, nobody's allowed to speculate what that might be for."
Carl
Cogito Ergo Amicrosoft
And, BTW, dear reader, don't CC me and the bloody list / group too!
