tejek, Jake,
LU's need for an XLSW is not as significant or dire, as it were, as CSCO's was, when the latter picked up the other programmable star, SUMA (Summa Four). But, IMO, they could use an XLSW for its modular and distributive approach.
Several years back it was all that NT and LU could do, but to keep up with the programmables who are able to turn over code at lightning speed compared to the normal rev cycles required by the DMS and 5E types.
During the interim period LU and NT have both made significant strides to streamline their own platforms, but they are still not anywhere near the nimbleness of the smaller programmables (SUMA and XLSW) who, by the way, have each taken measures [the programmables have] to integrate various modes of IP and ATM traffic into their backplanes, as well.
Yes, it would make sense to me for both LU and NT to at least give them a good examination as a takeout. In fact, I'd be very surprised if they haven't, already.
Regards, Frank Coluccio |
