North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

RE: it's here

  • From: Deepak Jain
  • Date: Thu Feb 14 03:43:42 2002

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]On Behalf Of
Stephen Sprunk
Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 2:52 AM
To: Ron da Silva; [email protected]
Subject: Re: it's here

Thus spake "Ron da Silva" <[email protected]>
> BOTH linerate filtering and packet inspection should be part of the
> requirements to sell routing hardware. in case any vendor out
> hasn't heard this directly from us, consider this a clarification of our
> requirements.  And UUnet's...and ??  any other providers want to make sure
> that the vendor community gets the message here?

The people paying the bill often don't have the same concept of requirements
as the engineers.

Don't get me wrong -- I think you're right and all gear should be capable of
line-rate bi-directional filtering (and forwarding for that matter ;).
However, speaking in general terms, when presented with a box that can and a
box that can't, 90% of customers will end up buying the cheaper one, and
that dictates vendors' development priorities.


This also is related to concept that most vendors [when creating a box that
does and a box that doesn't] don't charge anywhere near in line for the cost
of inputs [hardware, design, software, etc] for the additional feature
[assuming profit is already built into the original price of the box that

Deepak Jain