[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       juniper-nsp
Subject:    Re: [j-nsp] 400G is coming?
From:       <adamv0025 () netconsultings ! com>
Date:       2019-03-19 17:46:34
Message-ID: 007801d4de7b$b4c12ed0$1e438c70$ () netconsultings ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

> Thomas Bellman
> Sent: Monday, March 18, 2019 11:26 PM
> 
> On 2019-03-18 23:24 +0200, Saku Ytti wrote:
> 
> > Cheaper is subjective. To a small and dynamic shop CAPEX may represent
> > majority of cost. To an incumbent CAPEX may be entirely irrelevant,
> > money is cheap, but approving hardware to network may be massive
> > multiyear project. This is why platforms like GSR had so long tail.
> 
> It's just too often used even when the customer *is* capex sensitive, to fool
> them into believing they are saving money on the hardware.
> 
> "Buy this chassis based switch!  It costs twice as much as the fixed- config
> datacenter switch, gives you half the number of ports [and the ports are
> heavily oversubscribed], but four years later you can just buy more and
> newer linecards [each costing as much as an entire fixed- config switch]
> instead of replacing the entire switch!  [Oops, we forgot to tell you that the
> new linecards will require a new super- visor card as well.]  Protecting your
> investment [putting *your* money in *our* coffers] is something we are
> good at!"
> 
> I've seen that kind of marketing and sales techniques, concentrating on the
> capex (and being misleading, if not outright lying, about it), too many times,
> and people falling for it.  I've kind of become allergic to that wording...
> 
> Sorry for the rant...
> 
It's definitely one for the decentralization at the edge musing, that is big \
monolithic PEs vs smaller (even purpose/service specific) PEs.

adam 


_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]