nanog mailing list archives
Re (2): Core router bakeoff?
From: Eric Germann <ekgermann () CCTEC COM>
Date: Fri, 08 May 1998 11:42:40 -0400
At 10:10 PM 5/7/98 -0400, jkucic () kpmg com wrote:
Eric Germann <ekgermann () cctec com>,Internet writes:
<snip> </snip>
Hey, you haven't spoken with your local Cabletron rep lately; Cabletron is pushing channel relationships again.
The abuser says "I won't do it again, I swear". Yeah right.
Now that I ragged on em, they do have solid stuff. I have one client who has had their MMAC hubs up and running for about 8 years with narry a hiccup. And these are in rotten basements. You are right but is it Year 2000 compliant?
Do we really care if an unmanaged hub is Y2K compliant? As long as it forwards packets.... BTW, saw a great ad the other day from Nortel on y2k compliance on T1 concentrators. Anyone have any idea why it matters in a mux, if it isn't managed? Eric
Thanks, Joe Kucic
Current thread:
- Re (2): Core router bakeoff? jkucic (May 08)
- Re (2): Core router bakeoff? Eric Germann (May 08)
- Re: Re (2): Core router bakeoff? Dalvenjah FoxFire (May 08)
- Re: Re (2): Core router bakeoff? Michael Dillon (May 08)
- Re: Re (2): Core router bakeoff? Forrest W. Christian (May 09)
- Re: Re (2): Core router bakeoff? Dalvenjah FoxFire (May 08)
- Re: Re (2): Core router bakeoff? Michael Shields (May 09)
- Re: Re (2): Core router bakeoff? Dean Anderson (May 11)
- Message not available
- Re: Re (2): Core router bakeoff? Jay R. Ashworth (May 11)
- Re: Re (2): Core router bakeoff? Dean Robb (May 11)
- Re (2): Core router bakeoff? Eric Germann (May 08)
- Re: Re (2): Core router bakeoff? Scott Whyte (May 11)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Re (2): Core router bakeoff? jkucic (May 08)
- Re: Re (2): Core router bakeoff? John Butler (May 08)