The feature licensing has pros and cons. If you need all of the features required, it is frustrating to have to buy the licenses. If you *don't* need all of those features, though, it is nice not to have to pay for them. Maybe Brocade could market two different configurations, a "full" configuration with all licenses and a "light" configuration with none of them with an a la carte list of additional upgrades available. That would allow people to purchase a fully licensed unit and not have to worry about being "nickled and dimed" with the various licenses while people needing only a subset of features can put together set of only the features they need. The problem is the way the literature is put together. It is difficult to get a grip on exactly what you need or if the CER can handle your needs.
As for cannibalizing MLX sales, honestly, the way I think of the CER is as a miniature MLX. I think of it as a one slot MLX. On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 6:52 AM, Greg Hankins <[email protected]>wrote: > Let me clarify the CES and CER architectures real quick. As Nick nicely > said, the fixed form factor routers are designed with feature scalability > and cost trade-offs to provide a lower port price vs. a modular chassis. > > The NPUs are merchant silicon, but each router also has an FPGA that > handles various control plane packets that need to be processed with > subsecond latency (for example, we are adding BFD hardware assist in 5.6). > > We hear your negative feedback about feature licensing. > > Greg > (works for Brocade) > (as a product management person) > > -- > Greg Hankins <[email protected]> > _______________________________________________ > foundry-nsp mailing list > [email protected] > http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/foundry-nsp >
_______________________________________________ foundry-nsp mailing list [email protected] http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/foundry-nsp
