Forum Discussion
@Moon_Lee Performance aside, are you really planning to use Intel's propitiatory and closed-source network IPs which you have no control over, in a national project? A project like this should have very stringent security requirements including absolute avoidance of any piece of proprietary code/IP and I would assume all code for such project would have to be developed in-house to ensure its security and functionality. At the end of the day, if you want to push Intel to do what you want, you would be better off going through your local FAE (i.e. whoever you purchased the boards from); you must have access to a high-level FAE if you are working on a national project.
@HRZ Open source adoption has been made common place in national R&Ds, at least here in Korea. I would say, hardening security up to the required level can be agnostic to whether codes are open or closed. Moreover, building everything from a green grass is neither possible nor desirable for modern telco applications these days. Even most of Gov. R&D stakeholders here are well aware of the paradigmatic shift towards Open Networking & Computing. (Well, the only exception would still be the Defense sector though.) No problem at all in our leveraging Intel N3000 PAC platform, as long as Intel stay being a trusted supplier.
So, I am still wondering how Intel would want to react to this non-carrier-grade stigma..?