|
Does Verizon's Voyager stack up to the iPhone? |
|
|
5 IT skills that won't boost your salary 
[1,407]
Women 4 times more likely than men to cough up personal info [589]
Japan's 10 funniest tech-related commercials [Videos] [407]
Throwing away a promo CD is "unauthorized distribution"? [1,265]
Adults too quick to dismiss educational video games [682]
Attack of the iPhone clones [Slideshow] [578]
10 things IT needs to know about AJAX [1,258]
This Year's 25 Geekiest 25th Anniversaries [Slideshow] [409]
|
|
I would tend to agree with
I would tend to agree with Justin, in addition to adding a few more comments.
- There is at least one WAN Optimization appliance that I know of that performs "unattended install" quite well. Most vendor appliances are also managed via some sort of Central Manager which both aid in reduction of OpEx.
- Deploying a stand alone device allows greater flexibility in scaling. Seperating the OS is also a benefit, relying on IOS which can be "buggy" at times could cause issues with what the router does best - route. Some vendor appliances offer more disk space which helps build and keep a larger dictionary, and offer more memory to provide for specific optimization techniques.
- Deploying an appliance in an "off-path" solution (WCCP) also allows for "quick" remediation if there are any issues with the technology by simply disabling redirection.
For most vendors an off-path solution would size to just about any branch; whereas the technology deployed in a router would require a 2800 or 3800. This might not be feasible in smaller branch sites for some enterprises.
Just some thoughts from the experiences I have had with testing and evaluation.