From: Surjamukhi Chatterjea (surchatt@cisco.com)
Date: Fri Jun 20 2003 - 18:57:50 GMT-3
Tim,
I think a possible reason the TAC engineer might not have done due
diliegence is that he/she may have thought you are trying to find the answer
to a lab scenario, unless you clearly explained to them that you are
troubleshooting a production network.
Granted there is no excuse for making such an assumption, but a lot of
people do use TAC as a resource for lab prep you know. To the extent of
using Cisco TAC to find answers to questions that were actually on the CCIE
exam.
I understand your frustration, and I agree with Henry that you should eam
really sorry to know that you had a bad experience with TAC, and I hope it
will be better for you going forward.
Thank you
Surja
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
Henry Chou
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 2:17 PM
To: JPratt@coh.org; timothy.snow@eds.com; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: Cisco TAC satisfaction rating going down....
Jeremy,
Trust me, Cisco does value your business. Your $2M/yr retires quota for
your account team, and your account team gets paid becaue of your business.
Account SE's get paid when their customers are happy, so your account team
has significant interests in your satisfaction of services that you receive.
It's unfortunate that your account team was let go, but I think the economy
plays a bigger role in that than what Cisco has control of.
And for TAC, customer always has the options of escalate if that pleases the
customer. I don't think there are that many companies that let customers
decide the priority of a TAC case. And, if you desire (not that I'm
promoting this), you can open your TAC case as P1 and get immediate
attention.
Cheers!
Henry
From: "Pratt, Jeremy" <JPratt@coh.org>
Reply-To: "Pratt, Jeremy" <JPratt@coh.org>
To: "'Henry Chou'" <henchou@hotmail.com>, timothy.snow@eds.com,
ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: Cisco TAC satisfaction rating going down....
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 11:05:12 -0700
That only works if your account team is around. My team just got laid
off
and I didn't know about it until I tryed calling the rep and the SE. I
finally had to call corporate and scream at them before the regional
sales
manager assigned me a new team.
I guess Cisco doesn't value a customer that dishes out 2 million a year.
As for TAC I am having the same issues.
I just opened a case on a CE560 cache engine. The CFS volume keeps
dismounting both drives and one drive crashed. The tac rep wanted to
walk me
through rebuilding the drives again. I finally had to escalate the case
to a
manager to get an RMA. The unit is only a month old and even with
smartnet
it's still covered under warranty.
-----Original Message-----
From: Henry Chou [mailto:henchou@hotmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 8:55 AM
To: timothy.snow@eds.com; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: Cisco TAC satisfaction rating going down....
Tim,
You need to take this issue immediately to your Cisco Account team. You
are
doing Cisco a favor by raising issues such as this because you paid for
SmartNet and you're entitled to receive satisfactory services. Also,
your
account team will help you avoid bad experience such as this next time
you
open a TAC cases.
Henry
From: "Snow, Tim" <timothy.snow@eds.com>
Reply-To: "Snow, Tim" <timothy.snow@eds.com>
To: "'ccielab@groupstudy.com'" <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Subject: Cisco TAC satisfaction rating going down....
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 11:46:10 -0400
I opened a TAC case with the pim sparse-question that I had regarding
whether the RP needs to be told it is the RP. I got about 6 emails from
some of you and this is the response I got from the Cisco TAC. First
off,
I don't see how he didn't understand what I was asking and it appears
all
they want to do is send their customers a link to a webpage. Sheessh.
Here's my initial question, his response and then my follow-up response.
I've very surprised that you would just send me to a link on the
website.
Isn't it obvious from my debugs and question that I know how to
configure
multicast but was merely asking the question of "who was right?"
I wasn't asking whether I needed an RP or not, what I was asking was
whether
the RP needed to be configured with it's own ip address which the "ip
pim
rp-address" command.
I also made 2 specific references to books showing that one says
basicallly
1) the RP needs itself to be configured, and the other says 2) The RIP
doesn't need to know and just assumes..
BTW, the 6 other people people that responded to my email to a cisco
study
group had no problem understanding the question that I asked for the
book
references that I made...
Tim
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Jul 04 2003 - 11:11:04 GMT-3