Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : SONS -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: danofthebes who wrote (71)	5/6/2001 5:05:29 PM
From: Ibexx	Respond to of 1575

I am not totally convinced that the two events (GX choosing CSCO; JNPR/SONS alliance) are not related in some way. Sonus' website provides a list of major customers and GX is on top of the list. Apparently, some sort of alliance also exists between SONS and GX. sonus.net (under customer profile) Ibexx

To: danofthebes who wrote (71)	5/7/2001 1:01:19 AM
From: Theophile	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1575

I did not mean to imply the SONS//JNPR effort was in response to the GX//CSCO deal, but that the timing of this announcement indicated there had been involvement by all parties. From what I can gather, difserv and RSVP are not going anywhere, RSVP having been shown to be non-scalable and complex, difserv not having any significant plusses over MLPS which is already established. That CSCO certifies SONS gear is certainly understandable. Especially this is the case for future evolution of the market. If CSCO can certify another maker's gear, then down the road when CSCO eats their lunch, or vice versa, the gear can still be plug and play. The market is bigger due to standardization efforts. Priority packets are just that: priority. Guaranteed delivery of a high priority packet implies fulfilling certain QoS specs, and I would assume CSCO can establish such specs and fulfill them, while other offerings have yet to put it into writing. I would not know personally, but I am still looking for the definitive reason CSCO can put it in writing and others are not so inclined. It could of course be marketexture but this level of visibility implies some form of marketing guarantee, and it would be this area that would be interesting to examine, and what financial values are attached to this particular line of endeavour. And yes Ibexx, I sort of view the cooperation amongst various gear vendors and network customers as necessary to grow the market for the vendors, and to establish credibility and alternative sources for the customers. Customers do not wish to be stranded by being hooked into one vendor who then goes ballistic or develops production bottlenecks. While I believe the CSCO//GX thing could have revolved largely around price, I cannot believe this is the only element. Obviously GX was inclined to use the more friendly (according to them who should know) gear by JNPR, and has relations with SONS (as does WCG ;^) too, but chose CSCO. To have some anal with a bearish outlook on CSCO declare it was price alone is insufficient evidence. Besides, what is Stix' position in JNPR and SONS? Thanks for the response, MartinT