& cplSiteName &
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View        ADD A COMMENT
<<   <   Page 3 / 6   >   >>
optical_man
optical_man
12/5/2012 | 2:40:17 AM
re: Procket Stuffing Its Pocket
Time to chime in.

I respect Tony Li. He seems smart and knows what he's doing.

However.

I've never seen a CTO troll a message board. Especially one like LR.

As a student of my Engineers, as well as historical Business Cases, I am starting to see something;
If Procket fails, the MBA business cases (yes, they study the winners/losers, ie, SW Air is an easy one), anyway, Procket will be studied as a "Classic Failure", and one of the points made by the Prof's at USC, Stanford, Princeton, Purdue, UT, NYU, will be "their CTO spent time on electronic message boards defining/defending his product instead of........"

That's what my little mind has told me while watching Mr. Li post message after message over that last XX months.
Tony Li
Tony Li
12/5/2012 | 2:40:15 AM
re: Procket Stuffing Its Pocket

Hi all,

First, I have to thank all of the opposition for their contributions. We must be doing something right to inspire such angst.

Second, I should point out a nit: I am not CTO, that's Bill. My official title is Chief Scientist.

Third, I should also point out that my primary job function is to talk to customers. This is true for other CTO/CS types from other companies as well. This makes me ask the obvious question: given that we've constructed the Internet as the communications infrastructure for the next century, why aren't they using it? We are not limited to PowerPoint at absurdly priced executive conferences, IETF, NANOG and the like.

Fourth, Procket starting shipping production systems in Jan. 2003 with the 8801 and the 8812 in July.

'Nuf said,
Tony
routethus
routethus
12/5/2012 | 2:40:15 AM
re: Procket Stuffing Its Pocket
Optical_man,

>> "their CTO spent time on electronic message boards defining/defending his product instead of........" <<

Which goes to show you how truly little business schools know about how things really work. Business schools are for people running big companies.

It is fine to discuss the merits of how someone uses their time. But in this case, this is issue has so little to do with the success or failure of this company it is laughable to even bring it up.

Doing so totally trivializes the technological challenges, the market dynamics, the management dynamics, and whether or not there is even room for a third major(independent) player or not.

There is no doubt that leaders understanding what the true priorities of a company is key to the success/failure scenario, but I doubt very much in this case, that there is anything Tony *would* do, if he had the time back, that would make much material difference.

This issue completely misses all the truly relevant points.

BTW, given how many posters don't use their real names, how do you have any idea how many CTOs are posting?
stonerocks
stonerocks
12/5/2012 | 2:40:15 AM
re: Procket Stuffing Its Pocket
Time will tell if Procket would succeed or not. It
won't matter what you and I say.

On the other hand, if you and I can post on this
message board, why not everyone else, CTOs, CEOs?
reflection
reflection
12/5/2012 | 2:40:13 AM
re: Procket Stuffing Its Pocket
>Depends on how you define "production". One
>man's bread-n-butter (feature) is another man's
>poison (missing feature).

I'm not talking about esoteric features surferboy. I'm talking about stardard BGP, OSPF/ISIS, and MPLS that large providers run in their backbone. I'm talking about interoperating with incumbents such as Juniper and Cisco (companies can't afford a complete forklife vendor change). From what I've been told, procket's OS is still severely unpolished (this is from a direct source). Eventually they may get it right.

>Well it sounds like you're not one of Procket's
>customers, so you don't matter anyways ...

Tell me a good reason why I should be a procket customer. I can't think of one. Unless they are willing to give me some friends and family stock options :). Tony, can you hook a brother up?
jstuart_99
jstuart_99
12/5/2012 | 2:40:12 AM
re: Procket Stuffing Its Pocket
reflection,

You have some bad info there.. Don't know if your friend tested an early version or what, but it is a very different story today. The only feature you listed that Procket doesn't have is 2547. I've seen it run BGP, OSFP, ISIS, and Martini. Ive seen IPv6, Multicast, QoS, and numerous other "non-existant" features you claim they don't have. I've seen Cisco, Juniper, and even F10 interoperability across GE, OC-48, OC-192, & 10GE.

As far as polished is concerned, Procket's beta code is FAR more stable than other vendor's FCS code.

Finally this is based on actual observation and testing. I participated in SCINET2003 where Procket hosted the bandwidth challenge with an 8812 almost fully loaded.

One point to Tony - Procket really should have more information available on the web site, if nothing more than to keep people like reflection from spreading untrue rumors.

JStuart
BluMountain
BluMountain
12/5/2012 | 2:40:11 AM
re: Procket Stuffing Its Pocket

A little hard to find, but both are public on the webpage at:

www.procket.com/products_8812_...
reflection
reflection
12/5/2012 | 2:40:11 AM
re: Procket Stuffing Its Pocket
I'm talking BGP the way providers run it. Sure, zebra can do BGP, so can an Agilent or Ixia - but that's a far cry from what is needed in a major backbone. Things like their route-maps/routing policy still needs work. Also something about a FIB limitation (do i hear yet another chip respin?).

>As far as polished is concerned, Procket's beta
>code is FAR more stable than other vendor's FCS
>code.

What do you base this statment on? Come on, you know very well that code takes bake time in real networks (I'm talking years). Your statement is ludicrous.

Canned demos don't really portray the complete truth...you know that too.

Like I said, I wish them the best. More competition is better for everyone. This forces vendors to improve their products. On the other hand, I'm very much against vapor/hype. Show the world what you've got so we can evaluate it.
jstuart_99
jstuart_99
12/5/2012 | 2:40:08 AM
re: Procket Stuffing Its Pocket
Oh, one more thing for reflection...

I agree with you on your stance against hype, but I personally believe that Procket is a contender. Only time will tell if they will succeed.

One thing I would like to see from them is more information. It isn't like they are in stealth mode, and you would think they would want to generate as much interest as possible...

JStuart
jstuart_99
jstuart_99
12/5/2012 | 2:40:08 AM
re: Procket Stuffing Its Pocket
reflection,

Why don't you call up Tony at Procket and ask to demo the product for 30 days? I'm being completely serious here, I know they do it because I asked. If I were in a position to do the testing I would, but encourage you to do so.

Give us your unbiased opinion after you finish testing it.

With regards to the stability of the code, it is common knowledge that Procket's code has been in 'real' networks for over 2 years now, going on 3. You can read about it on LR in the message boards. Everyone I have talked with that has tested the product says it is very stable.

JStuart
<<   <   Page 3 / 6   >   >>


Featured Video
Upcoming Live Events
October 22, 2019, Los Angeles, CA
November 5, 2019, London, England
November 7, 2019, London, UK
November 14, 2019, Maritim Hotel, Berlin
December 3-5, 2019, Vienna, Austria
December 3, 2019, New York, New York
March 16-18, 2020, Embassy Suites, Denver, Colorado
May 18-20, 2020, Irving Convention Center, Dallas, TX
All Upcoming Live Events