I am still a very proud alumnus of Cisco Systems, but am also not bashful about areas I think the networking behemoth can improve.  My primary recommendation would be to get the business units working together to consistently solve customer problems – be a big company, but act like one company, as opposed to the 20 or 50 or so initiatives, boards, councils, or work streams that they employ. 

As a former commissioned combat arms officer I will state that some things are better run in a command and control environment if you want consistency and necessary if your customers want a consistent experience.

The recent ‘data center’ announcement of 10GBASE-T products really served to illustrate this better than I could ever explain.

According to Cisco’s Frequently Asked Questions about their 10GBASE-T products for the Catalyst 6500 and 4500 they state the following:

Q. Is the 10GBASE-T line card on the Catalyst 4900M compatible with Gigabit Ethernet?

A. The 10GBASE-T line-card module on the Cisco Catalyst 4900M supports Gigabit Ethernet or 10 Gigabit Ethernet mode for each port group. The eight ports are divided into four port groups, and each port group can be configured to operate in either Gigabit Ethernet or 10 Gigabit Ethernet mode. All ports within the same port group must have the same mode. This allows customers an easy migration path from Gigabit Ethernet to 10 Gigabit Ethernet network connectivity.

Q. Can the 10GBASE-T line card on the Cisco Catalyst 6500 Series be connected to Gigabit Ethernet network adapters using auto-negotiation?

A. No, the 10GBASE-T line-card module will not support Gigabit Ethernet. It will support 10 Gigabit Ethernet network adapters only.

Can someone explain to me how the board, or council or whatever new-age org model is in charge decided that customers want a 10GBASE-T port that would support your existing cable plant but not interconnect your existing GbE attached servers on one switch (the Catalyst 6500 – hard coded into the PHY so it is not a field or software upgrade) and wanted a completely different behavior on the other (Catalyst 4900 that did the rather obvious feature of speed auto-negotiation)?

Quick car analogy, since some people who have issues with ‘synthetic tests’ (apparently auto-negotiation tests are synthetic now too….)

Why build a network equivalent of a Bentley Continental GT that goes either 12mph or 120mph yet requires a mechanic to switch between the two speeds, and then have the audacity to claim that this offers an easy migration path between the city street and the autobahn? (analogy credit to Ed, you know who you are!)

This makes no sense to me.