Cisco Plans for Cisco Works?

Unanswered Question
Oct 3rd, 2007

Does Cisco ever intend on making a hardware Cisco Works platform rather than a software version for various Operating Systems? It seems making a hardware version with license key downloadable modules e.g. RME, DFM, etc etc would make more sense and create a lot less technical issues for TAC and the customer. Any progress towards moving this direction?

I have this problem too.
0 votes
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Overall Rating: 3.7 (3 ratings)
Joe Clarke Wed, 10/03/2007 - 09:46

There are currently no plans to convert LMS to an appliance. Actually, appliances typically make TAC's job harder. We would not be able to provide customers patches as easily as we can now.

Martin Ermel Thu, 10/04/2007 - 00:22

That sounds good ! I think it is good that you could have a deep insight look into the processes and dependencies of this software and do some troubleshooting on your own - if you want to - but it is not necessary. And there are prerequesites for the installation on Solaris and Windows - with this and keeping the software on a dedicated server (and not along with other (management) applications) you are through the worst regarding these basic points.

brandon.n Thu, 10/04/2007 - 05:31

I disagree. Reason I say so is how can cisco have a model like the IDS 4210 or new models of such devies running on a Dell Server with windows server software as the base? By having the users version of windows software as the base, you leave yourself open to MORE TAC cases. A STANDARD hardware platform like Cisco does with its other products makes much more sense than a Solaris software suite and a Windows Software sweet and then adding the different builds of those two Operating Systems. I don't think anyone can convince me the way Cisco is doing is, 1. Good for Business 2. More Efficient for TAC Engineers 3. Easier to troubleshoot 4. Works more seamlessly than my reccomendation.

Think about it from another angle... One car body style for instance the Honda Civic. Then you have the Civic "DX", Civic "SI", Civic "EX" andf Civic "LX". The SI is the best, that would be like a Cisco Works Hardware Platform Preloaded with all the Modules (i.e IPM, DFM, RME, etc etc). This way every customer has the same server and the same OS and the "recovery disc" that come with their respective server has an "image" of what they purchased "preloaded". When a customer wants a new feature like RME they can input the license key on the server after purchasing and it will "unlock" or download from Cisco and install the app. This way Cisco can know exactly the customer base platform to ensure bugs and testing work more efficiently. I don't think this is rocket science as more and more business models are doing this even McDonald's... you order the same "Big Mac" but when you want more you "super size" for x amount of cents more. It is the same Sandwich just added more fries and a larger coke.

Explain to me how a customer couldn't "look deep into the processes and dependencies" with my idea?? I think nothing changes but making a standard HW accross the board with a more efficient way to upgrade/patch the system.

yjdabear Thu, 10/04/2007 - 05:48

I second the need for a CiscoWorks appliance solution. For one, it'd greatly simplify troubleshooting without having to first rule out all the other vendor software on the same host "sharing" (//cough *contending for* //cough) the same resources, such as the third-party java -4444 interference with SyslogCollector that I experienced. After all, Cisco Secure ACS has an appliance offering, as does (did)? Cisco NetFlow Collector, so why not LMS or other CiscoWorks bundles for that matter? That being said, I won't hold my breath for one, given Cisco's stance.

brandon.n Thu, 10/04/2007 - 05:56

Excellent post, you mention many great examples and seem to have the same viewpoint as me.

You hit the nail on the head contradicting the CCIE that posted defending Cisco's current position with your statement, "For one, it'd greatly simplify troubleshooting without having to first rule out all the other vendor software on the same host sharing the hardware resources, such as the third-party java -4444 interference with SyslogCollector that I experienced."

Tell me how Cisco's current stance lowers the amount of workload for TAC SE's working Cisco Works cases?... it doesn't. The process is flawed and as a former Cisco stock holder, Cisco Works was why I sold off my shares because if they are running Cisco Works the way they are, how as an investor am I convinced they aren't doing the same with their other products?

Great post! Thank you!!


This Discussion