nanog mailing list archives
Re: Arista unqualified SFP
From: Mark Tinka <mark.tinka () seacom mu>
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 14:18:47 +0200
On 18/Aug/16 13:47, Denys Fedoryshchenko wrote:
Same here, i was considering Arista, because they are quite cost effective,feature rich, interesting hardware for developing some custom solutions. But no more, after reading about unreasonable vendor lock-in. But such inflexibility are very bad sign, this "openness" looks like marketing only, under the hood it seems worse than other solutions on market. Also when support shows such inflexibility, it is very bad sign. And very sad.
Don't be too hasty. See my response earlier. Mark.
Current thread:
- Re: Arista unqualified SFP, (continued)
- Re: Arista unqualified SFP Ethan (Aug 18)
- Re: Arista unqualified SFP Stanislaw (Aug 18)
- Re: Arista unqualified SFP John A. Kilpatrick (Aug 20)
- Re: Arista unqualified SFP Tim Jackson (Aug 20)
- Re: Arista unqualified SFP Ricky Beam (Aug 18)
- Re: Arista unqualified SFP Eric Kuhnke (Aug 18)
- RE: Arista unqualified SFP Ryan DiRocco (Aug 19)
- Re: Arista unqualified SFP Alain Hebert (Aug 19)
- Re: Arista unqualified SFP Eric Kuhnke (Aug 19)
- Re: Arista unqualified SFP Denys Fedoryshchenko (Aug 18)
- Re: Arista unqualified SFP Mark Tinka (Aug 18)
- Re: Arista unqualified SFP Fredrik Korsbäck (Aug 18)
- Re: Arista unqualified SFP Ryan Gelobter (Aug 23)
- Re: Arista unqualified SFP Ryan, Spencer (Aug 23)
- Re: Arista unqualified SFP Ryan Gelobter (Aug 23)