x
<<   <   Page 9 / 21   >   >>
broadbandboy 12/4/2012 | 7:47:46 PM
re: Lucent Bags High-End Switch "Haven't seen many cell-based MPLS networks (and they did not work very well if IP Navigator was involved)."

Sounds like a challenge for these new-fangled multiservice switches to solve; carriers would like an MPLS solution that works and enables interworking between legacy cell and frame (ATM+MPLS+IP) networks.

And by the way, this has been a most excellent and informative discussion the past few days. Thanks to everybody for sheding some light on the mysterious goings on in Lucent-land and the surrounding suburbs!
seen_the_light 12/4/2012 | 7:47:43 PM
re: Lucent Bags High-End Switch >1) The CLEC Wars are over, the ILECs and IXCs
>won. (This is good news for LU since their execs
>form golf foursomes with the execs of above and
>reminisce about the good ol' days of Western >Electric.)

All par for the course. [Bah-dum-dum...dishhhhh].


>4) ATM is not dead yet. Given current capital
>budgets, carriers would much rather buy cards
>for existing boxes, and not new boxes.

Very true, and the following isn't directed at "orange".

Even when capital budgets weren't so lean carriers were reluctant to pull rack-size switches. They'd much rather utilize the existing real estate, whether it's cards in existing backplanes, small boxes on top/below or a gutting of the rack and filling with several smaller machines. Most people trying to get into the carrier business know very little about the politics/labor behind these labor intensive "swap outs". It's not just what the fork lift guy charges y'know...


>5) MPLS is a hack thought up by Cisco in a
>futile attempt to give connection-based
>qualities to a connectionless technology.

Clever one though, you have to admit.


>The bottom line line is that decisions at
>Lucent are not due to business reasons,
>they're personal.

I don't completely agree with this. Like ALL companies, many decisions are indeed personal (promotions, layoffs, golf courses, etc.) but to just bluntly say that Lucent business decisions in general are based purely on personal reasons is LUdicrous and comes off highly Massachusetts/Acquisition centric (not that it is surprising given how LU handled their data networking acquisitions).


>And don't try to pass those SSG guys as some
>elite organization, I've worked with them. They
>are, at best, completely ordinary. The only
>possible explanation is some exec level deal
>between Dave and Hilton

Or maybe they're just regular ordinary people/employees. There's not one company or group in existence that has "the best of the best", the "cream of the crop", or even "The Cascade team" (implying that the whole company is Hot Hot Hot and everyone there is "awesome", a "genius"). There may be groups of people who move together and like working with each other and come off as "geniuses", but it's probably more likely they simply are efficient and experienced. Some companies have excellent engineers and lousy management/sales and are unsuccessful while others have excellent management/sales and a mediocre group of engineers and IPO. The latter comes off as a "Successful Team", the other, "a bunch of losers". Which would you be lucky to get an engineer from (or sales guy)? You'll never know until it's too late.

Hey, Light Reading, this BB system is quite lame - how about something more modern with real threading, etc.?
seen_the_light 12/4/2012 | 7:47:42 PM
re: Lucent Bags High-End Switch
>The vaunted team of Cascade engineers
>predominantly went to the following startups
>(and thus sealed the fate of Lucent's INS
>division):

INS's fate, as you call it, was sealed more by the people that remained (from Jersey AND Westford originals) and poor carrier and customer planning than by attrition.


>-Sycamore
>-Coriolis: WHAT?
>-Equipe
>-WaveSmith

Without naming names, of course, or getting into all the secret handshakes ("What's that dog's name?" or "What (who?) was the REAL problem at AT&T?", or "What sandwich at the Met was named after someone in Westford?"), care to elaborate on why you think Coriolis got them a large share?

I'll give you the SCreaMeR guys [who, ironically, were the ones who developed the code installed at AT&T and didn't hang around to see the collateral damage and suffering (not that I blame them, no matter HOW good Mory was with the evergreening)].

Equipe: Maybe a handful and that's it, right?
Instant Heritage: Add water (and PR), makes it own sauce. Some very talented software and hardware engineers are there but the percentages simply don't jive with your claim.

Wavesmith: Again, percentage-wise, many. Also good mix of some great talent from New Oak.


>We all know what happened with SCMR. Most of the
>ex-Cascaders there are multi millionaires (the >rest are extremely underwater).

To the shock and dismay of many of their former co-workers. :)


>Coriolis seems to be pretty quiet. Any info?

Oh, yes, the'ol "I heard they were kicked out of there." or the "It's very quiet over there.". Can't forget the classic, "I heard their VC's want their money back." (who doesn't?).

My personal favorite? -- "I heard they lost thier whole sales team, CFO and [hot] receptionist."


>Equipe also seems pretty quiet.
>They had a major problem with their
>hardware a while back which
>set them back a bit.

What kind of "major" problem? Looked pretty good at Supercomm (but then, so did Oz - I got a yen for Big Boxes). Still, care to elaborate?

>They also can't seem to decide if they are an
>access play or a core switch - if access, then
>they really screwed up by not going after FR
>right from the start.

Who said they were an access "play"? Certainly no one there has, that I know of.


>My sources at WaveSmith tell me things couldn't
>be going any better.

Well, be honest, things could be going ALOT better for everyone (sorry, I had to find SOMETHING to say and this was easy).

>Everyone they talk to wants their switch
>yesterday, so it sounds like its a
>matter of executing in the near term. My contact
>at Verizon also has very positive things to say
>about them.

I've heard similar. Which I find amusing since as recent as one month ago I saw on this very board, "Wavesmith? I heard they were kicked out of Verizon." All I know is that their UPS/Fedex guys seem very happy.
lu-alum 12/4/2012 | 7:47:37 PM
re: Lucent Bags High-End Switch http://www.masshightech.com/di...
_____ 12/4/2012 | 7:47:36 PM
re: Lucent Bags High-End Switch Laura Howard, vice president of marketing for Gotham, says that refocusing from a switchG«÷s original market invites failure.

G«£ItG«÷s like saying can you take a six-cylinder car and make it into eight-cylinders,G«• Howard said. G«£You might be able to do it, but wouldnG«÷t you rather go out and buy a new car?G«•

GUESS NOW I KNOW WHAT HAPPENED TO GOTHAM AND HOW THEY GOT THERE.

lu-alum 12/4/2012 | 7:47:35 PM
re: Lucent Bags High-End Switch She would know about defocusing product development!

Actually, I'm having my card upgraded to car 1.5 tomorrow to add the additional cylinders.
right_leading 12/4/2012 | 7:47:34 PM
re: Lucent Bags High-End Switch
8 cylinders in a 6 banger? Popular upgrade for Volvo 240/260's. Real sleeper. Quicker than factory for sure!
broadbandboy 12/4/2012 | 7:47:33 PM
re: Lucent Bags High-End Switch Interesting article. ATM core is dead, ATM/Frame lives only at the edge--good for WS, bad for Equipe?

What happens to ATM/Frame traffic--carriers feed it onto core routers using MPLS? What happens to Frame/ATM performance and QoS? Thats not going to be so easy.

BBboy
ipfan 12/4/2012 | 7:47:32 PM
re: Lucent Bags High-End Switch According to the latest figures, it's a three horse race anyhow; Cisco, Unisphere and Juniper. No one's going to wait for the Lucent's and Nortel's of the world to decide which products they kill and which they keep.
http://www.masshightech.com/di...
_____ 12/4/2012 | 7:47:32 PM
re: Lucent Bags High-End Switch IPFAN:

So waht you are saying is Ilec's and IXC's are willing to take a Frame/ATM based network and drop a Unisphere edge router into the core? Or will the "every bit IP" argon core router surfice?

How could you drop a packet based core router into a cell based network? If this were remotely possible, don't you think that Tenor and Vivace would have a leg up because of their advanced MPLS technology?

I think your assumptions may be off target. Unisphere is well positioned for packet based networks where the ERX edge router would be a big hit- but for a core ATM network- does not sound right- you are mixing oil and vinegar.

The article you mention aslo mentions the Avici Terabit Router- this could never be dropped into a cell based network. It has no ATM interface.

And Juniper does not have an ATM solution and Cisco can't develop a carrier based Core ATM switch.
<<   <   Page 9 / 21   >   >>
HOME
Sign In
SEARCH
CLOSE
MORE
CLOSE