Cisco TAC KRAP !!

Alex P. Rudnev alex at
Fri Jun 25 18:36:19 UTC 1999

> Did you send back the survey with appropriate comments filled out?  Did you
> attempt to contact someone about the support level you received?  Have you
> made any attempt at all to help Cisco solve the problem?
Yes, we are doing it every time. Note, we don't blame CISCO at all - I 
undertsnd the big company can't keep direct contacts betwee high-skilled 
technicians and the customers except some very important ones.

We have a goot feedback by the technical seminars and local support 
people from the AMT Group (the better cisco reseller in the Russia), and 
sometimes with the CISCO Russia people.

And then, there is different interests. If I understand the situation 
right, CISCO is injecting a huge intellectial and financial capital into 
the VoIP, ATM, WDM technology etc etc and is trying to get a goot rate 
amongs the big international TELCO's. No doubt, the traditional issues 
such as _IP CORE BACKBONE_, _DIALUP ACCESS_, etc etc are shifting to the 
second level. No one can blame the vendor for this approach.

Through we had some success in technical contacts last months, but I 
recommend everybody don't hope to the technical support. It he 
(everybody) is not 100,000 employee telco.

On the other hand, just CCO web service fill in this gup between _low 
skilled_ human support and _high skilled technicians_. I think it should 
be better if CISCO support some kind of WWW conferences, some kind of 
excanging _know_how_ between their customers, but I undersnand it's not 
so easy to develop such support. If we make some complains here, or if I 
(sometimes) refer to the CISCO as an example when something work wrong, 
it don't mean we are dissatisfyed - in comparation with the others CISCO 
have an excellent support. 

Through I think we are talking about one vendor too much here, and get 


> Cisco is very concerned about the level of support our customers get; any
> duly reported problems are looked into and we attempt to resolve everything
> we can.
> However, calling people clowns and sissies on a public mailing list is
> unlikely to solve your problem, regardless of what company your problem is
> with.  Grow up.
> And FYI, Cisco has over 7 million web pages internally just for Cisco
> employees; just because your engineer may not be personally acquainted with
> your exact question (I dare you to find *any* human who can be up on every
> single detail of our products) doesn't mean he's wandering around on CCO.
> Stephen
>      |          |         Stephen Sprunk, K5SSS, CCIE #3723
>     :|:        :|:        NSA, Network Consulting Engineer
>    :|||:      :|||:       14875 Landmark Blvd #400; Dallas, TX
> .:|||||||:..:|||||||:.    Pager: 800-365-4578 / 800-901-6078
> C I S C O S Y S T E M S   Email: ssprunk at
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: TOO MUCH
> To: nanog at
> Sent: Friday, June 25, 1999 11:43
> Subject: Cisco TAC KRAP !!
> Over the last year it seems that the quality of service I have received from
> TAC has diminished. At one time I found myself speaking to a knowledgeable
> engineer. Who knew the product and protocols involved and they were willing
> to share information.
> The norm these days is to get an engineer who knows less then I do. I'm call
> requesting technical information pertaining to their products, What I get is
> some clown telling me to hold on while he surfs the internal web page
> looking for the answer. I can scan CCO myself!!
> Is it just me ?
> Phantom hates Cisco or should I say Sissy-Co TAC!!
> _______________________________________________________________
> Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit

Aleksei Roudnev, Network Operations Center, Relcom, Moscow
(+7 095) 194-19-95 (Network Operations Center Hot Line),(+7 095) 230-41-41, N 13729 (pager)
(+7 095) 196-72-12 (Support), (+7 095) 194-33-28 (Fax)

More information about the NANOG mailing list