|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2002 17:20:42 -0500 Cc: "Robert A. Hayden" <rhayden@geek.net>, "Stephen J. Wilcox" <steve@telecomplete.co.uk>, "Simon Lyall" <simon.lyall@ihug.co.nz>, "Nanog (E-mail)" <nanog@merit.edu> To: "Stephen Sprunk" <ssprunk@cisco.com> From: Marshall Eubanks <tme@multicasttech.com> In-Reply-To: <041701c297e9$87651cc0$f7333b41@amer.cisco.com> Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu I just heard that NPR is about to do a piece on this - it should air in a few minutes... Marshall On Friday, November 29, 2002, at 03:32 PM, Stephen Sprunk wrote: > > Thus spake "Robert A. Hayden" <rhayden@geek.net> >> I'm still failing to see why this required a $3M forklift of new >> equipment >> to correct the problem. Was this just Cisco sales pouncing on >> someone's >> misfortune as a way to push new stuff? > > Environments with a STP diameter of 10+ are unlikely to have the > necessary > equipment on-hand to make a L3 campus network that adheres to current > best > practices. Nevertheless, it is TAC policy to get the customer the > equipment > that is needed to solve the problem, and Sales handles any monetary > issues > later after the network is stable. > > One might also consider if there was a campus upgrade plan already in > the > works and this event merely altered the timeline for implementation. > > S >
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |