nanog mailing list archives
Re: A case against vendor-locking optical modules
From: "Justin M. Streiner" <streiner () cluebyfour org>
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2014 15:34:50 -0500 (EST)
On Mon, 17 Nov 2014, Jérôme Nicolle wrote:
Is it unrealistic to hope for enough salesmen pressure on the corporate ladder to make such moronic attitude be reversed in the short term ?
No salesperson is likely to do that for you. They know only to well that eliminating vendor lock-in means they will lose sales on artificially costly optics from $vendor to a lower-cost rival. Less sales = less commission for the affected sales person.
jms
Current thread:
- A case against vendor-locking optical modules Jérôme Nicolle (Nov 17)
- RE: A case against vendor-locking optical modules Naslund, Steve (Nov 17)
- Re: A case against vendor-locking optical modules Faisal Imtiaz (Nov 17)
- Re: A case against vendor-locking optical modules Jérôme Nicolle (Nov 17)
- Re: A case against vendor-locking optical modules William Herrin (Nov 17)
- Re: A case against vendor-locking optical modules Justin M. Streiner (Nov 17)
- Re: A case against vendor-locking optical modules Valdis . Kletnieks (Nov 17)
- Re: A case against vendor-locking optical modules Justin M. Streiner (Nov 17)
- Re: A case against vendor-locking optical modules Faisal Imtiaz (Nov 17)
- RE: A case against vendor-locking optical modules Naslund, Steve (Nov 17)
- Message not available
- Re: A case against vendor-locking optical modules Clayton Zekelman (Nov 17)
- Re: A case against vendor-locking optical modules ryanL (Nov 17)
- Re: A case against vendor-locking optical modules Ken Matlock (Nov 17)