Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you?

James Smith james at jamesstewartsmith.com
Mon Jan 10 11:38:10 CST 2011


All the places I've worked in the past decade have been all Cisco shops for
routing and switching, with a lot of Cisco use for security too (firewalls
and IDS).  Same with my current position, but we're switching to Juniper for
all those product categories.  Same or better performance, but 10-20% less
cost.  Additionally, I find the Juniper command line has more features that
make operating and monitoring much more efficient.  Also, JunOS has only one
development train which means that the commands I use work on every single
Juniper platform.  It always bugs me when I’m trying to setup QOS across a
network with different Cisco platforms (CatOS, ASA, different versions of
IOS) and each platform has a completely different way of doing it.

F5 all the way for content management.

TippingPoint for IPS.


On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 10:31 AM, Brandon Kim <brandon.kim at brandontek.com>wrote:

>
> Hello gents:
>
> I wanted to put this out there for all of you. Our network consists of a
> mixture of Cisco and Extreme equipment.
>
> Would you say that it's fair to say that if you are serious at all about
> being a service provider that your core equipment is Cisco based?
>
> Am I limiting myself by thinking that Cisco is the "de facto" vendor of
> choice? I'm not looking for so much "fanboy" responses, but more of a real
> world
> experience of what you guys use that actually work and does the job.....
>
> No technical questions here, just general feedback. I try to follow the
> Tolly Group who compares products, and they continually show that Cisco
> equipment
> is a poor performer in almost any equipment compared to others, I find that
> so hard to believe.....
>
> Thanks!
>
> Brandon
>
>




-- 
James Smith



More information about the NANOG mailing list