re: Riverstone Enters Edge FraySo the only services that the 15000 will support from day one are Ethernet aggregation and Ethernet VPWS/VPLSGǪ although at some unknown point in the future it will support some ATM/FR - so where does multi-service come into it? RS are marketing this box at the edge because they know they can't make it in the core - It has nothing to do with 'multi-service', thatGÇÖs just the latest buzzword the RS marketing team have jumped on.
To be fair, on RS's website they call the 15000 an Ethernet Edge Router, but they do also describe it as a multi-service edge router. They also claim that the 15000 is "the first Ethernet edge router to employ a distributed and modular operating system architecture." Clearly this is a lie as several vendors offer edge routers with distributed/modular architectures that support Ethernet.
Can anyone think of a single reason why a carrier would choose RS over other established players at the edge?
I don't believe many carriers are looking for a 'God Box' that can do everything at the edge, but they are looking for convergence. Why would a carrier choose this box when there are more mature boxes out there that already support multiple interfaces/services today such as the Juniper M320, Laurel ST200, Tellabs 8800? These boxes support today's services/interfaces (FR/ATM/BRAS/RFC2547/VPLS/etc.) while offering a migration strategy towards Ethernet access.
Considering Riverstone's size and uncertain financials, its difficult to see how they can compete with the big players at the edge, especially when the box will only support Ethernet from day one. I doubt the 15000 will delay the inevitable, it might even speed things upGǪ.
The only option for them is to go to their current customer base and plead with them to do a "swap". Unfortunately, a lot of the carriers I know are pretty leery of RS and would be hesitant to deploy a new platform especially when they have more mature platforms to choose from.
re: Riverstone Enters Edge FrayThey will be able to sell it like they do their other boxes (and a Cabletron did for years), for 1/3 the price of the competition ( they may even give it away just to establish a customer base) as well as putting a tech on site forever. Hey hope they can keep making payroll as the industry does not need anymore unemployed people.
re: Riverstone Enters Edge FrayI agree that Riverstone has been the equivalant of the gang that couldn't shoot straight over the past 2 years. Essentially, they wasted away their technical competitive advantages through poor leadership. HOWEVER, I do think that the company is slowly beginning to get it's house back in order. Late? Most definitely. Too late, definitely not. Riverstone, for better or worse, seems to have a compelling enough MPLS/VPLS Metro Ethernet market strategy. Similarly, they are one of the few vendors in the space to have previous (dated) enterprise deployment success stories in the metro space. Is it enough to break thru the Cisco/Nortel/Juniper/Tellabs stronghold? I guess time will tell............
re: Riverstone Enters Edge FrayYes, I agree that RS had a very good product in YAGO and frittered it away. Their BGP was second to none and they won a lot of deals against Juniper's M20 series. Of course, Juniper lost any deal with GigE ports as the M20 GigE was just too expensive.
re: Riverstone Enters Edge FrayI agree that Riverstone has been the equivalant of the gang that couldn't shoot straight over the past 2 years. Essentially, they wasted away their technical competitive advantages through poor leadership. HOWEVER, I do think that the company is slowly beginning to get it's house back in order. Late? Most definitely. Too late, definitely not. Riverstone, for better or worse, seems to have a compelling enough MPLS/VPLS Metro Ethernet market strategy. Similarly, they are one of the few vendors in the space to have previous (dated) enterprise deployment success stories in the metro space. Is it enough to break thru the Cisco/Nortel/Juniper/Tellabs stronghold? I guess time will tell............
To be fair, on RS's website they call the 15000 an Ethernet Edge Router, but they do also describe it as a multi-service edge router. They also claim that the 15000 is "the first Ethernet edge router to employ a distributed and modular operating system architecture." Clearly this is a lie as several vendors offer edge routers with distributed/modular architectures that support Ethernet.
Can anyone think of a single reason why a carrier would choose RS over other established players at the edge?
I don't believe many carriers are looking for a 'God Box' that can do everything at the edge, but they are looking for convergence. Why would a carrier choose this box when there are more mature boxes out there that already support multiple interfaces/services today such as the Juniper M320, Laurel ST200, Tellabs 8800? These boxes support today's services/interfaces (FR/ATM/BRAS/RFC2547/VPLS/etc.) while offering a migration strategy towards Ethernet access.
Considering Riverstone's size and uncertain financials, its difficult to see how they can compete with the big players at the edge, especially when the box will only support Ethernet from day one. I doubt the 15000 will delay the inevitable, it might even speed things upGǪ.