The MPLS-OPS Archive[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index] Re: IGP tuning for TE versus MPLS-TE
Elk, I think there are a few misconceptions in your statement copied below "guess ,could not state that they are clueless too . also the doc have the cisco logo" My reading of this statement is the following: 1. The implication is that the discussion referring to the previous MPLS bashing article, stating the author as clueless was based on his dismissal of MPLS as a technology. This was not the case, he was dismissed as clueless as the basis for his conclusions were false. Following the garbage in, garbage out principle, any conclusions drawn from inaccurate data is worthless and anyone that does so is clueless. 2. That the Cisco logo on the document is in some way showing Cisco endorsement of the view that MPLS does not have merit, which is not the case. The Cisco logo used is the Cisco Powered network logo, all that indicates is that the Sprint network is deployed predominantly on Cisco equipment. Now more specifically, Cisco has no technology religion, all technologies are tools that have applicability in some areas and not others. For Sprints specific network (which is quite certainly unlike the majority of the networks managed by those on this list), their operations and value proposition to their customers, MPLS is not their favored technology for delivering services, that's fine for them. If your network looks the same, you have the same operations, service delivery philosophy and so forth as Sprint, then the conclusions may well be applicable to your network too. I didn't see anything in the article suggesting that MPLS was not appropriate for other carriers. Chris At 03:31 AM 10/30/2002, M. ELK wrote: Their is some hot debate previously on this list about an article on MPLS which stated that no need for MPLS ,anyhow the conclusion from this debate was that the writer of such article is clueless .
|
|