North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Re: Networking Pearl Harbor in the Making
Well, the last time I just whined a lot ? <grin>How do the operators/engineers explain to 'management', or whomever asks,Cisco, Juniper, or vendor "X". We all benefit by having "genetic diversity" in our routing/switching systems. I have been bit hard, as many of us on this thread have been bit, by bugs in vendor software/hardware. Support your IETF! Don't use proprietary protocols and insist on interoperability. If you have the wherewithal install at least two different vendors for your critical services. Then make them play nice together!
Seriously, we actually put together a presentation that described a series of major events that have occurred through the use of monoculture networks/systems and stated that for many financial/ security reasons it is best to maintain at least two vendors.
We covered the following
o Security Implications: How monoculture networks/operating systems are prone to attack.
o Financial Impact: How managing multiple vendors can reduce long term expense.
o Stability: How monoculture networks/systems are prone to network/ system wide failures.
o Viability: How existing technology is capable of interop and how we, the engineering team, were capable of making it happen.
o Customer demand: How our customers actually "felt better" about our service as a result of it's genetic diversity.