nanog mailing list archives
Re: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you?
From: Seth Mattinen <sethm () rollernet us>
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 15:20:19 -0800
On 1/10/2011 14:54, Brandon Kim wrote:
To be fair to Cisco and maybe I'm way off here. But it seems they do come out with a way to do things first which then become a standard that they have to follow. ISL/DOT1Q HSRP/VRRP etherchannel/LACP Just some examples..... I'm not aware of too many other vendors that create their own protocol, in which they then become a standard?
All I found (quickly without trying too hard) is that the IEEE version is based on Cisco's MISTP rather than PVST. ~Seth
Current thread:
- Re: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you?, (continued)
- Re: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you? Greg Whynott (Jan 10)
- RE: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you? Brandon Kim (Jan 10)
- Re: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you? Greg Whynott (Jan 10)
- RE: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you? Brandon Kim (Jan 10)
- Re: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you? Thomas Donnelly (Jan 10)
- Re: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you? Greg Whynott (Jan 10)
- Re: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you? Jeff Kell (Jan 10)
- Re: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you? Greg Whynott (Jan 10)
- Re: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you? Seth Mattinen (Jan 10)
- RE: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you? Brandon Kim (Jan 10)
- Re: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you? Seth Mattinen (Jan 10)
- Re: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you? Owen DeLong (Jan 10)
- Re: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you? lorddoskias (Jan 10)
- RE: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you? Brandon Kim (Jan 10)
- Re: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you? Valdis . Kletnieks (Jan 10)
- Re: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you? Owen DeLong (Jan 10)
- RE: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you? Brandon Kim (Jan 10)
- RE: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you? Justin M. Streiner (Jan 10)
- Re: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you? Greg Whynott (Jan 10)