Terje Bless wrote:
> On the RPS-300, we didn't do the checking we should have before buying > and ended up with what for us were essentially 30 boat anchors. My > conclusion in the end was that it's much better to keep (in our case) > a bunch of spare 3524s (another "brilliant" purchase, *sigh*) and > replace the entire unit in case of PSU (or other) failure. The RPS-300 > and its ilk simply makes zero sense to me (even if it's now dirt > cheap). Oh, we have plenty of spare 3550's and would swap the entire switch in case of a internal PSU failure, it is just a matter of wanting to control downtime vs. having an outage in the middle of the night. The RPS-300 seems to provide at least that much benefit. --Mike _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
