[86483] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Networking Pearl Harbor in the Making
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Blaine Christian)
Mon Nov 7 11:44:39 2005
In-Reply-To: <2348.63.82.145.55.1131380779.squirrel@63.82.145.55>
Cc: "Robert Boyle" <robert@tellurian.com>,
"Jared Mauch" <jared@puck.nether.net>, nanog@merit.edu
From: Blaine Christian <blaine@blaines.net>
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 11:44:10 -0500
To: ekgermann@cctec.com
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On Nov 7, 2005, at 11:26 AM, Eric Germann wrote:
>
> Looks like vendor J is going to benefit from the issues laid out for
> Vendor C.
>
> http://www.networkworld.com/news/2005/110405-juniper-cisco-hacker.html
>
Cisco, Juniper, or vendor "X". We all benefit by having "genetic
diversity" in our routing/switching systems. I have been bit hard,
as many of us on this thread have been bit, by bugs in vendor
software/hardware. Support your IETF! Don't use proprietary
protocols and insist on interoperability. If you have the
wherewithal install at least two different vendors for your critical
services. Then make them play nice together!
There, now I feel much better... glad to get that off my chest.
And yes, I actually have put my money where my mouth is and built a
stable and efficient dual core with Cisco and Juniper running MPLS
together. To be fair I was a bit wimpy about installing some of the
latest greatest tricks though <grin>.
Regards,
Blaine
