On (2008-03-19 13:58 -0500), Justin Shore wrote:
> Support for 3rd-party SFPs.
You're asking quite lot, why would company want to actively support 3rd party
SFP, they'd need to spend money testing them without getting revenues, I
know my company wouldn't do it.
Cisco does accept 3rd party SFP's though, but does not support them. I'm
happy with the situation and think it's very realistic and fair.
>
> Support for longer-ranged single-strand optics (10k doesn't come close
> to cutting it.
>
> Configuration comments.
>
>
> Drew Weaver wrote:
> > What are some persistent things about Cisco products that
> > no matter how high into the product line you travel you cannot get away
> > from? I was sitting around the other day thinking about how odd it is that
> > in 2008 the BGP scanner still causes the CPU utilization to jump
> > ridiculously high (on pretty much all routers I've seen..from 7200 to
> > 128xx), and all of the various limitations of the route table sizes in
> > various Cisco products. I realize these issues are either harmless or
> > explainable ("just the way it is") I just think it is a strange/interesting
> > thing to note that years later the same issues are still present in
> > technology no matter how far up you go in the line.
> >
> > Not sure what prompt these things in my head :D
> >
> > -Drew
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected]
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected]
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
--
++ytti
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
