re: Charlotte's Networks, Take 2No shit. If I had ever done that stuff I wouldn't be asking somebody to interpret the data for me would I?
If you need the interpretation for something besides chewing the rag on a message board, maybe it's time to do the research yourself. There are publicly available RFCs on the subject, and quite a few good web pages, etc. Trying to get dnewman to comment asks him to jeopardize his credibility.
re: Charlotte's Networks, Take 2Since in the first test CWNT tested 3 months before the other guys I wonder if they had Charlotte's test results, such as they were, in front of them before they stated testing? Just currious.
You mean the ones where CWNT got mopped all over the floor? What for?
re: Charlotte's Networks, Take 2skeptic wrote: Were he to make the comments several people here are/were pressing him to make, to me that would be far worse than any of his (wrong) actions in the original test. ---------------------
i guess the right move for would have been to just not write at all. once he started there was no eazy way out for him. (i almost feel sorry for the guy )
re: Charlotte's Networks, Take 2with a lot of potential and some innovative visions, that seems to deliver. At least, for the first part. While it looks as if there is plenty of technological upside (TDM, clustering, QoS model, Aranea-2, ...)
David Newman is an integer tester with strong personal convictions.
Its hard to believe that David Newman would do MPLS LSP test on original test if the numbers were meaningless.
SO, I asked friend, who is expert in networking, and he told me LSP numbers have nothing to do with software. The LSP numbers indicate processing power of the machine - mainly CPU or Asics.
re: Charlotte's Networks, Take 2I would like to ask Mr. Newman why there was a three month gap between the test of CWNT and the tests of CISCO and JUNIPER at the first time?Wasn't they suppossed to show up all at the same time and if not why did you started with CWNT.
re: Charlotte's Networks, Take 2Another question if I may ask: If time is so importend why don't you conduct another test with maybee new players in the field? and why at the testing site the first page still anounces that juniper wins while maybee there will be someone else that will win? remmember it has been along time since the last test and all the companies improved thier machines.
re: Charlotte's Networks, Take 2FWIW "CW apparently now has 6 betas going.... one with Deutche Telecom.... hmmmmm...where did i see that name recently?"
Look at the source.