[5485] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: GigaRouter (Was Re: Cisco as Big Brother))
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Daryn D. Fisher)
Mon Oct 21 18:13:40 1996
From: "Daryn D. Fisher" <oz@thoughtport.net>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 96 10:48:31 -0600
To: edd@acm.org
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Reply-To: oz@thoughtport.net
Begin forwarded message:
Subject: Re: GigaRouter (Was Re: Cisco as Big Brother))
To: freedman@netaxs.com (Avi Freedman)
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 17:46:54 +0400 (AMT)
Cc: alex@relcom.eu.net, nanog@merit.edu, paul@vix.com
In-Reply-To: <199610211323.JAA25866@access.netaxs.com> from "Avi
Freedman" at Oct 21, 96 09:23:08 am
From: edd@acm.org
Sender: owner-nanog@merit.edu
the livingston comparision is not even warrented, they lack any
real extensible functionality (only RIP for one exam.)
and with over 30% failure rate on hardware, don't even think about it.
> Bay is not. Proteon is not. Gated (for me, so far) is not.
> Microrouters are not. Morningstars are/(?were?). Livingstons
> are not.
Why Livingstons are not??? They're terribly easy to configure, IMHO...
> > Aleksei Roudnev, Network Operations Center, Relcom, Moscow
>
> I can only speak for myself, of course.
Me too,
Ed
