RE: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you?

[Brandon Kim <brandon.kim () brandontek com>]

to which they would try and play the "well most people don't mix gear"..



ha! Funny if you responded with, "Oh really? Thanks I didn't know that, I guess I'll get all HP...who do I talk to, to 
return this Cisco router?"





> From: Greg.Whynott () oicr on ca
> To: brandon.kim () brandontek com
> CC: khomyakov.andrey () gmail com; nanog () nanog org
> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 15:20:06 -0500
> Subject: Re: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you?
>
> just a side note,  HP probably was the most helpful vendor i've dealt with in relation to solving/providing inter 
> vendor interoperability solutions.   they have PDF booklets on many  things we would run into during work.  for 
> example,  setting up STP between Cisco and HP gear,  ( 
> http://cdn.procurve..com/training/Manuals/ProCurve-and-Cisco-STP-Interoperability.pdf ).
>
> At the time the other vendor in this case (cisco) flat our refused to help us.  this was a few years back tho,  
> things may of changed.  I'd ask support "you are not telling me i'm the _only_ customer trying to do this" …   to 
> which they would try and play the "well most people don't mix gear"..
>
> HP's example should be the yard stick in the field.
>
> -g
>
>
>
> On Jan 10, 2011, at 3:04 PM, Brandon Kim wrote:
>
> > To your point Andrey,
> >
> > It probably works both ways too. I'm sure HP would love to finger point as well. I remember reading for my CCNP one
> > of the thought process behind getting all Cisco is the very reason you pointed out, get all Cisco!
> >
> > How convenient though for Cisco to do that, I wonder if they are being sincere(sarcasm).
> >
> > Wouldn't it a perfect world for Cisco to just have everyone buy their stuff...I think it's a cop out though and you 
> > really should
> > try to support your product as best you can if it is connected to another vendor.
> >
> > I'm sad to hear that TACACS took that route. I hope they at least tried their hardest to support you.....
> >
> >
> >
> > > From: khomyakov.andrey () gmail com
> > > Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 14:35:36 -0500
> > > Subject: Re: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you?
> > > To: nanog () nanog org
> > >
> > > There have been awfully too many time when Cisco TAC would just say that
> > > since the problem you are trying to troubleshoot is between Cisco and
> > > VendorX, we can't help you. You should have bought Cisco for both sides.
> > > I had that happen when I was troubleshooting LLDP between 3750s and Avaya
> > > phones, TACACS between Cisco and tac_plus daemon, link bundling between
> > > juniper EX and Cisco, some obscure switching issues between CAT and
> > > Procurves and other examples like that just don't recall them anymore.
> > >
> > > Every time I'm reminded that if you have a lot of Cisco on the network, the
> > > rest should be cisco too, unless there is a very good technical/financial
> > > reason for it, but you should be prepared to be your own help in those
> > > cases.
> > >
> > > Vendors love to point at the other vendors for solutions. At least in my
> > > experience.
> > >
> > > My $0.02
> > >
> > > Andrey
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 11:52 AM, Greg Whynott <Greg.Whynott () oicr on ca>wrote:
> > >
> > > > I've tried to use other vendors threw out the years for internal L2/L3.
> > > > Always Cisco for perimeter routing/firewalling.
> > > >
> > > > from my personal experience,  each time we took a chance and tried to use
> > > > another vendor for internal L2 needs,  we would be reminded why it was a bad
> > > > choice down the road,  due to hardware reliability,  support issues,
> > > > multiple and ongoing software bugs,  architectural design choices.  Then
> > > > for the next few years I'd regret the decision.     This is not to say Cisco
> > > > gear has been without its issues,  but they are much fewer and handled
> > > > better when stuff hits the fan.
> > > >
> > > > the only other vendor at this point in my career I'd fee comfortable
> > > > deploying for internal enterprise switching,  including HPC requirements
> > > > which is not CIsco branded,  would be Force10 or Extreme.  it has always
> > > > been Cisco for edge routing/firewalling,  but i wouldn't be opposed to
> > > > trying Juniper for routing,  I know of a few shops who do and they have been
> > > > pleased thus far.    I've little or no experience  with many of the other
> > > > vendors,  and I'm sure they have good offerings,  but I won't be beta
> > > > testing their firmwares anymore (one vendor insisted we upgrade our firmware
> > > > on our core equipment several times in one year…).
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Cisco isn't a good choice if you don't have the budget for the smart net
> > > > contracts.   They come at a price.   a little 5505 with unrestricted license
> > > > and contract costs over 2k,  a 5540 about 40k-70k depending on options,
> > > > with a yearly renewal of about 15k or more…
> > > >
> > > > -g
> > > --
> > > Andrey Khomyakov
> > > [khomyakov.andrey () gmail com]
>
>
> --
>
> This message and any attachments may contain confidential and/or privileged information for the sole use of the 
> intended recipient. Any review or distribution by anyone other than the person for whom it was originally intended is 
> strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender and delete all copies. 
> Opinions, conclusions or other information contained in this message may not be that of the organization.