Don't confuse UUNet with WCOMs data networking division? UUNet is WorldCom, WorldCom is UUNet. All one big happy family right? A while back WorldCom finally stiff armed all UUNet people to fully integrate. Even to the point where you were not allowed to have your signature say UUNet on it it had to say WorldCom (and basically I think that was the day we lost control of the rudder and started heading towards that iceburg). WorldCom is Compuserve, UUNet, MFS, ANS, Rythms, and alot of others. I think this string is pretty silly. As if a carrier as big as WorldCom would be an all this or an all that shop. WorldCom is so huge there is no way you could catagorize it as a _______ shop. What Cisco router are you going to use to run DDCMP? We've got an entire network that runs a modified version of X.25 and the line protocol is called DDCMP. We've got like a bazillion routers out there (almost 30 billion ;-) and we've acquired like a bazillion different companies over the years. I see Junipers, Nortels, Lucents, Bays, Fujitsus, 3Coms, and a whole lotta Ciscos. I don't think the first guy can start counting his chickens right yet. I don't have any unrealistic ideas on what will happen to WorldCom, but even if banruptcy occurs I don't think we will just shut our doors and go home especially our backbone and managed data services. (Don't get me wrong though I'm definitely worried and am studying like a madman for my lab in August, and getting my resume out) I think it's terrible that something like this has happening to UUNet. UUNet was such a great company. An awesome backbone. We are one of the only backbones big enough and have enough traffic management charachteristics to be able to offer awesome SLA's from site to site through the internet. So many cool research projects going on for instance we have a multicast backbone, and an IPV6 backbone. All kinds of neat stuff. I've never learned so much. I think we are seeing the furthering of this industry coming to a screeching halt. My catch phrase is we might not do everything right here and might be a little screwed up here and there, but we are definitely the least screwed up ISP out there. This industry in my opinion is just asking for a replay of the auto industry a few years back. Japan comes in, takes this place, clips off all the fat, adds in alot of quality assurance teams and completely dominates the market. Ok I'm done, I'm sorry, I'll get off my soapbox now since that security guard down the hall is saying I am tresspassing since this building is no longer owned by WorldCom -kidding ;-)
>>>Brian >From: "deltan" >Reply-To: "deltan" >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: Off Topic - Cisco vis a vis World Com [7:47505] >Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2002 03:48:57 GMT > >UUNet is a Cisco shop for sure (Canada and US). > >And don't confuse WCOM's data networking division with >UUNet (WCOM's subsidiary in Internetworking). > >Those students might be talking about the data >networking side....true or false, I don't know. > >-B :) > >--- Chuck wrote: > > Not too long ago, John Chambers was quoted in one of > > the networking > > magazines talking about erosion of margins, and > > partners who sold very > > cheaply. The talk on the street was that it was no > > secret he was talking > > about WorldCom, who have been notorious for their > > pricing of Cisco products > > as an inducement to use worldCom data circuits. > > > > I believe what used to be UUNet is a major user of > > Cisco equipment. that's > > one reason I asked about UUNet's viability. WCOM is > > going to end up selling > > assets, and it seems to me that the ISP is about the > > best asset they have. > > The network / fiber assets only contribute to the > > current fiber glut, so > > become less of a source of hope for revenue from > > sales. > > > > As far as what's in the carrier networks themselves, > > maybe this is less > > important to Cisco, as no carriers use their stuff > > anyway? ;-> > > > > BTW Juniper stock is not looking real good right now > > at all. Nor Ciena. > > > > > > ""John Kaberna"" wrote in message > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > Talking with a couple of my students (employees at > > Cisco) WCOM is mostly a > > > Nortel shop. They said that ATT and Sprint are > > Cisco Powered Networks so > > > they are the big providers that Cisco is > > interested in. This is not > > > official or anything from Cisco it's just what > > these guys are telling me. > > > > > > > > > ""Chuck"" wrote in message > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > > So far today I have seen no word from Cisco on > > its exposure to World > > Com. > > > > > > > > the other so called players in the networking > > industry - Redback, > > Nortel, > > > > and Lucent, have all said they have very little > > on the line with > > WorldCom. > > > > Of course, these are companies with one foot in > > the grave already. > > > > > > > > WorldCom is one of Cisco's MAJOR customers. > > Cisco stock is back close > > to > > > > it's low of the last year. Maybe Cisco believes > > nothing needs be said? > > > Maybe > > > > Cisco figures they can still sell their stuff > > through other channels? > > > > > > > > As an employee of another of Cisco's major > > customers, maybe this bodes > > > well > > > > for me? with WorldCom out of the way, and no > > longer selling at cost to > > > steal > > > > my customers, maybe my own business will pick > > up? > > > > > > > > Sheesh, this is scary. > > > > > > > > Anybody out there know how what used to be UUNet > > is doing? Viable? Any > > > > repercussions through the ISP world? >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free >http://sbc.yahoo.com _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=48194&t=47505 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
