On 12/29/16 10:22 AM, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
On Thu, 29 Dec 2016 07:44:45 -0800, Leo Bicknell said:
But I think the question others are trying to ask is a different hyptothetical. Say there are two vendors, of of which makes perfectly good edge routers and core routers. What are the pros to buying all of the edge from one, and all of the core from the other?
The *original* question, which seems to have gotten lost, was:
Say you're doing business in 100 countries, with some stated level of possible autonomy for each business unit.
Is it better for upper corporate to say "all 100 national business units will use vendor A for edge devices and vendor B for routing", or "all 100 business units shall choose, based on local conditions such as vendor support, a standard set of vendors for their operations"?
Stated differently, "Which causes more trouble - a mix of Vendor A in Denmark talking to Vendor B in Finland, or corporate mandating the use of Vendor Q even if Q doesn't have a support office in Kazakhstan while vendor F has an office in the building next door"?
ok I'll bite. imho, repeatable patterns of deployment are a great economic and organizational simplification. imho that doesn't mean they are identical. There may be generational differences even in what otherwise would be cookie cutter deployments, e.g. because devices go end of sale, new ones become available, regional vendor preference or vendor diversification. If these are centrally organized and operated or coordinated, then the minimum number of variants possible considering the circumstances where variation is is desirable. It minimizes the effort and training required to deploy and operate the system. If I were to take CDN pops as an example. Inter-generational variation is necessary as are accommodations for varying scale. the system is centrally coordinated and common operating methods are necessary if these systems are to behave a cohesive whole. Systems where deployment is less centralized, and local autonomy is therefore necessary as for example occurs when local contractors use their own equipment may come to different conclusions. e.g. that the specification of the minimum necessary common elements becomes the only feasible approach. For example if you are an Uber driver your minim IT requirements are something like Uber cell phone requirements iPhone requirements to run the Uber driver app Must be iPhone 4S, 5, 5C, 5S, 6, 6 Plus, 6S, 6S Plus, SE, 7, or 7 Plus running iOS 8 or later versions For best results: Use iPhone 5 or newer Android requirements to run the Uber driver app Any smart phone from 2013 or newer, running Android version 4.0 or newer For best results: The phone should run Android 5.0 or newer