nanog mailing list archives
Re: A case against vendor-locking optical modules
From: Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2014 15:44:59 -0500
On Mon, 17 Nov 2014 15:34:50 -0500, "Justin M. Streiner" said:
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.
I suspect that losing the commission on a few $6digit chassis sales is worse than losing the commission on a $3digit optic?
Attachment:
_bin
Description:
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)
- Re: A case against vendor-locking optical modules Jérôme Nicolle (Nov 17)