MJ <mike at jentges.net> writes: > > > Anyone know why Cisco EOL'd the 67x? > > > > > > I mean they had a monopoly in places like Qworst land. Why kill the the product? > > > > Phase out CBOS? EOL doesn't mean dead, at least for a few years, > > Probably, since they can't seem to produce a decent version. > > > anyway. I'll still use my Cisco 675 for a couple years to come at least. > > 678 maybe, but 675? Don't bet on it. Qwest hasn't sold/used the 675 for > quite some time now, AFAIK. They were telling new customers that the 675 > would not work with the lines now, or soon wouldn't. Details are fuzzy but > something to do with CAP and DMT or some such. I know there are 2 > different CBOS' for the 678 and it pertains to this somehow. I'm running a 675 happily so far. -- David Dyer-Bennet, dd-b at dd-b.net / Ghugle: the Fannish Ghod of Queries Book log: http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/Ouroboros/booknotes/ Photos: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/