re: Charlotte's Web: Who's Best Now?I saw this router on SuperComm. As far as I remember it has 16 slots each one supporting 10 Gigs of interfaces, i.e. 1 OC192 or 4 OC48.
re: Charlotte's Web: Who's Best Now?I like the statement "its also possible that its M160 wasn't configured as well as it might have been" in the article. I would suppose that a box with only half of the slots having line cards is very Juniper-friendly. :)
re: Charlotte's Web: Who's Best Now? CWNT made the classic mistake of having a "build it and they will come" mindset. The product has been working for a while, but they can't get much traction at customer sites. Its all they can do to keep themselves even on the "rader screens" of the people who watch this space.
They made a mistake in that they seriously embarrassed themselves in the light reading tests by going in before they were ready.
And since then, they have been obsessively focused on "correcting" their failure in the test results. And in my opinion, its a wrong focus for them. They have to build relationships with customers and sell their product. And benchmarks are only a side-issue in doing that.
re: Charlotte's Web: Who's Best Now?Give the writer the benefit of the doubt - it was a Freudian slip. They were trying to increase their anti-Cisco, anti-Juniper, etc.
re: Charlotte's Web: Who's Best Now?Actually, they WERE named Charlotte's Web Networks, but had to change since Disney owns the rights to that name.
Speaking of anti, this company is the ANTI marketing company. Juniper was too, but let their performance speak for itself. Charlotte's Networks' representatives don't return phone calls.
I'm surprised they got to quote anyone, unless it was from the press release. I give them 6 more months before they close shop.
How many slots? What kind of linecards?
Charlotte's web page is little help, and actually contradictory in some places.