NAC is a security trend for sure, but it's only as good as the policies you create. You can start with a partial solution and work your way to a full deployment.

NAC is an ecosystem; it's not a particular set of technologies.

It'll be the middle to the end of 2006 before companies have NAC up and running within the switch environment. 2006 will be the major year of getting your infrastructure up to date and defining your networking policies.

[None of the vendors crowding this important category of network security is likely to make really big waves this year.] It'll be the middle to the end of 2006 before companies have NAC up and running within the switch environment, ... 2006 will be the major year of getting your infrastructure up to date and defining your networking policies.

That's pretty good considering how many moving parts this technology has. NAC helps you keep the bad guys off your network.

Nortel should be able to bounce back.... But I'm not sure we're going to see any huge growth numbers anytime soon.

They've always been known as a good engineering company.

[Other vendors will] have to say they're NAC or NAP compliant. If they don't have that stamp of approval, they open themselves up to obsolescence if it becomes the standard.

I would argue that the operational burden far outweighs the capital gain. Firms that have started [deploying NAC] have stopped because of the complexity. You really can't get it up and running enterprise-wide from the get-go.