I agree with everything my brother said except recommending the Uniquiti EdgeSwitch. We have seen a few instances of the EdgeSwitch locking up without any apparent reason (once we traced it to a thermal issue, but we couldn't find a cause for the others). The EdgeSwitch also only has a 1 year warranty while the Netgear you mentioned has a Lifetime Warranty (for whatever that is worth). At (insert university name here) we were happily standardizing on Brocade ICX switches until we hit major OSPF firmware bugs. Dell N and S series are good, but also more expensive than that Netgear.
- Y On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 8:10 PM, Moshe Katz <mo...@ymkatz.net> wrote: > According to the specs that I found on HP's website, your HP switch does > not support 10Gb, only 1Gb on its mini-GBIC ports. You will definitely need > a new switch to take advantage of 10Gb. > > If you do get a switch that supports 10GBase-T, you should definitely > consider the Intel X540. The vast majority of reports that I have seen say > that it works great. (There was one report I found on a forum claiming > performance issues, but others on the same thread said it worked fine for > them.) > > There are also many dual-port SFP+ cards out there (such as the Intel X520) > that are not too expensive and support lots of different types of SFP+ > connectors. Although Intel does not make a 10GBase-T SFP+ itself, there are > third parties that make it. You would use one of those to connect to the > 10GbE feed into the rack and then a regular fiber SFP (or the option listed > below) to connect to the switch. > > To connect the pfSense to the switch, I would probably use a Direct-Attach > cable (DAC) instead of fiber or Ethernet. Approved Optics > <http://approvedoptics.com/> is a company that makes many OEM network > connectors under contract and they also make their own versions of them at > significantly reduced prices. Their DAC Finder > <http://approvedoptics.com/dac-finder/> tool lets you order a cable that > has SFP+ ends for different manufacturers (for example, an Intel end for > your pfSense and an HP end for your switch). There's no need to worry about > fiber or CAT7A Ethernet cables; just plug the cable in (taking care to make > sure it is oriented correctly) and that's it. > > Since you have a limited budget, I really recommend going the > direct-attached route. They are so much cheaper and more resilient than > fiber, and switches with SFP+ slots are often much cheaper than switches > with 10GbE. For example, you can get a Uniquiti EdgeSwitch with 48 Gb ports > and 2 SFP+ ports for just around $400. These are the switches I have used > in many of our limited-budget installations in the past (including in a > University setting like yours seems to be from your email address) and they > perform well. (Note that Approved Optics does not have official Ubiquiti > cables, but many on the Ubiquiti forums report that it works with Cisco and > other brand cables as long as they are 2 meters or shorter. In a single > rack, that should not be an issue.) > > > Moshe > > -- > Moshe Katz > -- mo...@ymkatz.net > -- +1(301)867-3732 > > On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 6:41 PM, Paul Mather <p...@gromit.dlib.vt.edu> > wrote: > > > A 10GBASE-T port became available to us in our server rack. The rack > > currently has a 20-node Hadoop cluster, each node having dual Intel i350 > > 1000BASE-T NICs. The Hadoop nodes connect to an old HP 2910al-48G > 48-port > > GbE switch that, in turn, connects to an old Dell R310 server running > > pfSense that serves as the WAN gateway for the cluster. > > > > It appears that the choice (not ours) of RJ45 for the 10 GbE provided for > > us in the rack will necessitate some equipment changes if we are to > utilise > > the 10 GbE connection. Having done some investigation, I've decided the > > following changes are likely needed, and I would like to solicit from the > > list comment regarding any obvious blunders in the plan below: > > > > 1) I need a 10 GbE uplink capability from my switch to the pfSense > gateway > > and also 10GBASE-T WAN connectivity from my pfSense gateway to the > > 10GBASE-T port in the rack. > > > > 2) The 10 GbE expansion options for the HP 2910al-48G are limited and I > > couldn't actually find any 10GBASE-T solutions (IIRC). If I went for 10 > > GbE SFP+ in the HP 2910al-48G that would mean I would also need 10 GbE > SFP+ > > capability in my pfSense gateway---likely meaning I would need two 10 GbE > > NICs (one SFP+ and one 10GBASE-T), which means... > > > > 3) It is probably cheaper (alas, we are on a budget) to buy a new switch > > to replace the HP 2910al-48G that includes 10GBASE-T uplink capability. > > That would let me just have a single 10 GbE card for the pfSense gateway. > > I think the Netgear GS752TX 52-port switch would be a good candidate as > it > > includes two 10GBASE-T ports in addition to the 48 1000BASE-T ports. > > > > 4) I am considering a Chelsio NIC for the 10GBASE-T WAN/LAN connections > > because I keep hearing these are the best-supported 10 GbE cards under > > FreeBSD. I'd get a Chelsio T420-BT but these seem to be discontinued in > > favour of the Chelsio T520-BT. Are there any better choices I should be > > considering? Intel X540-T2?? > > > > > > So, as I said earlier, are there any glaring problems in the above plan? > > (Does it seem sensible?) Or, alternatively, is there a much better > > solution that I've overlooked entirely? Constructive criticism/input is > > appreciated. > > > > Thanks in advance. > > > > Cheers, > > > > Paul. > > _______________________________________________ > > pfSense mailing list > > https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list > > Support the project with Gold! https://pfsense.org/gold > > > _______________________________________________ > pfSense mailing list > https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list > Support the project with Gold! https://pfsense.org/gold > _______________________________________________ pfSense mailing list https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list Support the project with Gold! https://pfsense.org/gold
