The question was what strategy of NAT deployment can be accepted by
large ISP if one of the internal condition to use only cisco boxes for NAT ?
Hidden cost was always visible to engeneers )
Now It is time to pay )
Has cisco plan to announce in next two year sucsessor of ISM-100 with
better performance ?
For example, if ISP already has asr9k chassis placed everywere in it's
network, it will be happy to know that in 2013 cisco planning to do
another card which will seat instead of ISM-100 into the same chassis.
Gert Doering пишет:
Hi,
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 07:01:10PM +0400, Ruslan Pustovoitov wrote:
Does this question not worry community ?
I think it's great that the hidden costs that come with running IPv4
now start being openly visible...
Sorry, what was the question?
gert
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
