Sam, In an SP environment, you may well have whole rows dedicated to a single service - email, or web say. In the rack itself, you'll have web_node_5007, web_node_5008 etc.
In the enterprise, you'll have a few email blades, internal web, external web, next to a bunch of file and print etc etc etc. These then likely are all on different firewall interfaces/firewalls in different zones requiring different routing and security. Kind regards Paul Wilkins On 4 October 2017 at 15:41, Sam Silvester <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 2:38 PM, Paul Wilkins <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Because SPs have the luxury to not use structured cabling, due to scale >> where all switch ports share a common configuration, so there's no need for >> a patch panel, just patch direct to the switch, whereas in enterprise, >> inadvertent swapping of ports leads to P1s, hence, structured cabling is >> fairly ubiquitous. >> >> > I'm not sure I understand. > > We're talking about "ToR" switching in this thread i.e. switches share a > rack with the servers in question. > > In both front and rear mounted switches, I'd assume all cables go direct > from the server to the switch. If that's not what you mean, can you perhaps > share what kind of cabling arrangement you've come across? I'd be > interested in how it would work and what logic would go into such a > decision. > > I'm also not sure how such a distinction between enterprise and SP would > change anything. SPs would still have a mapping of server to port, it's not > like just any server / cable goes into any old port and swapping them to a > new/different arrangement during a switch change wouldn't matter...or am I > making an incorrect assumption there? > > Cheers, > > Sam > > >
_______________________________________________ AusNOG mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
