Networking Pearl Harbor in the Making

Mon Nov 7 16:16:54 UTC 2005

> Convergence isn't going away because Networld Week thinks routers
> are insecure (no, really?).
> 
> It's an argument for vendor diversity.

There are two ways to interpret that last statement.

1. Network operators should build their converged networks using
equipment from multiple vendors, i.e. both Cisco and Juniper.

2. Companies should buy IP network services from more than one
network operator and should make sure that one vendor runs
a Cisco network and one vendor runs a Juniper network.

Which did you have in mind?

Personal, I think that convergence and diversity is one
of those eternal questions that is never solved. There
is an endless cycle as the flock moves first one way,
then the other. Somewhere in between is a nice point
of balance, but that too, is a moving target. There are
always a few who see the world in black and white who
move to extremes, but they are rarely rewarded for this
since an extremely converged network is a single point
of failure, and an extremely diverse network is unwieldy,
unmanageable, expensive, and ultimately, fragile.

It's good to see more focus on the security of embedded
systems but somehow I thing that major vendors like Cisco
and Juniper are going to address these problems INTERNALLY
and we will all be able to continue converging our networks
to run over an infrastructure provided by a two or three
key vendors.

--Michael Dillon

--Michael Dillon 