That just wrong. I know plenty people, that work on small-scale IT-infrastructure projects for municipal- and city-level administration. Cisco has become a liability as far as network equipment is considered.
Near as I can tell, you agree that Cisco is a hazard, in precisely the way that Huawei is accused of being but is not. Are you really just disagreeing with the proposition that nobody cares about Cisco's problems?
>> Are you really just disagreeing with the proposition that nobody cares about Cisco's problems?
Yes, thats what I am disagreeing with... Nothing more nothing less. No word of Huawei, since they are considered a liability by default and I don't know people that work with telephony/cell-network infrastructure.
Near as I can tell, you agree that Cisco is a hazard, in precisely the way that Huawei is accused of being but is not. Are you really just disagreeing with the proposition that nobody cares about Cisco's problems?