On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 03:38:15PM -0400, William Allen Simpson wrote:
> Anyway, wasn't the Open Compute Project supposed to fix all this?
> Why not just require OCP in all RFPs?
https://xkcd.com/927/
I think the primary issue for front- vs rear-mounted switches is cooling. As
long as you use switches that can pull cooling air from either the front or the
back, it’s feasible to mount the TOR switches in the back.
For example, I think these are parts I used to order for Cisco Catalyst
Folks,
I kind of started to doubt my perception (we don't officially calculate
it) of our failure rates until Mel provided this:
"That’s about the right failure rate for a population of 1000 switches.
Enterprise switches typically have an MTBF of 700,000 hours or so, and 1000
switches operating
On 9/25/21 7:52 PM, Joe Greco wrote:
On Sat, Sep 25, 2021 at 04:23:38PM -0700, Jay Hennigan wrote:
On 9/25/21 16:14, George Herbert wrote:
(Crying, thinking about racks and racks and racks of AT 56k modems
strapped to shelves above PM-2E-30s???)
And all of their wall-warts [...]
You were
That’s about the right failure rate for a population of 1000 switches.
Enterprise switches typically have an MTBF of 700,000 hours or so, and 1000
switches operating 8760 hours (24x7) a year would be 8,760,000 hours. Divided
by 12 failures (one a month), yields an MTBF of 730,000 hours.
-mel
On Sat, Sep 25, 2021 at 12:48:38PM -0700, Andrey Khomyakov wrote:
> We operate over 1000 switches in our data centers, and hardware failures
> that require a switch swap are common enough where the speed of swap starts
> to matter to some extent. We probably swap a switch or two a month.
...
This
* Andrey Khomyakov
> Interesting tidbit is that we actually used to manufacture custom rails for
> our Juniper EX4500 switches so the switch can be actually inserted from the
> back of the rack (you know, where most of your server ports are...) and not
> be blocked by the zero-U PDUs and all
I can install an entire 384lb 21U core router in 30 minutes.
Most of that time is removing every module to lighten the chassis, then
re-installing every module.
We can build an entire POP in a day with a crew of 3, so I’m not sure there’s
worthwhile savings to be had here. Also consider
> We operate over 1000 switches in our data centers, and hardware failures that
> require a switch swap are common enough where the speed of swap starts to
> matter to some extent. We probably swap a switch or two a month.
having operated a network of over 2000 switches, where we would see
On Sat, Sep 25, 2021 at 04:23:38PM -0700, Jay Hennigan wrote:
> On 9/25/21 16:14, George Herbert wrote:
> >(Crying, thinking about racks and racks and racks of AT 56k modems
> >strapped to shelves above PM-2E-30s???)
>
> And all of their wall-warts [...]
You were doing it wrong, then. :-)
On 9/25/21 16:14, George Herbert wrote:
(Crying, thinking about racks and racks and racks of AT 56k modems strapped
to shelves above PM-2E-30s…)
And all of their wall-warts and serial cables
The early 90s were a dangerous place, man.
Yes, but the good news is that shortly thereafter
(Crying, thinking about racks and racks and racks of AT 56k modems strapped
to shelves above PM-2E-30s…)
The early 90s were a dangerous place, man.
-George
Sent from my iPhone
> On Sep 24, 2021, at 8:05 PM, Wayne Bouchard wrote:
>
> Didn't require any additional time at all when equipment
Why about thinks like the Cisco 4500 switch series that are almost as long as a
1u server. But yet only has mounts for a relay type rack.
As far as boot times, try a Asr920. Wait 15 minutes and decide if it’s time to
power cycle again or wait 5 more minutes
Sent from my iPhone
> On Sep
On 9/25/21 2:08 PM, Jay Hennigan wrote:
On 9/25/21 13:55, Baldur Norddahl wrote:
My personal itch is how new equipment seems to have even worse boot
time than previous generations. I am currently installing juniper
acx710 and while they are nice, they also make me wait 15 minutes to
boot.
On Sat Sep 25, 2021 at 12:48:38PM -0700, Andrey Khomyakov wrote:
> We are looking at Nvidia (former Mellanox) switches
If I was going to rule any out based on rails it'd be their half width
model. Craziest rails I've seen. It's actually a frame that sits inside
the rack rails so you need quite a
> On Sep 25, 2021, at 12:48 , Andrey Khomyakov
> wrote:
> Let me just say from the get go that no one is making toolless rails a
> priority to the point of shutting vendors out of the evaluation process. I am
> not quite sure why that assumption was made by at least a few folks. With
>
On 9/25/21 13:55, Baldur Norddahl wrote:
My personal itch is how new equipment seems to have even worse boot time
than previous generations. I am currently installing juniper acx710 and
while they are nice, they also make me wait 15 minutes to boot. This is
a tremendous waste of time during
The "niceness" of equipment does factor in but it might be invisible. For
example if you like junipers cli environment, you will look at their stuff
first even if you do not have it explicitly in your requirement list.
Better rack rails will make slightly more people prefer your gear, although
it
Well, folks, the replies have certainly been interesting. I did get my
answer, which seems to be "no one cares", which, in turn, explains why
network equipment manufacturers give very little to no attention to this
problem. A point of clarification is I'm talking about the problem in the
context
Hi,
> On 24 Sep 2021, at 12:37, Andrey Khomyakov wrote:
>
> (you know, where most of your server ports are…)
Port side intake (switch at the front of the rack) is generally better for
cooling the optical modules. The extra cabling difficulty is worth it.
Also, as others said, choosing an
- On Sep 24, 2021, at 11:19 AM, William Herrin b...@herrin.us wrote:
Hi,
> Seriously, the physical build of network equipment is not entirely
> competent.
Except, sometimes there is little choice. Look at 400G QSFP-DD for
example. Those optics can generate up to 20 watts of heat that needs
On 9/24/21 10:58 PM, Owen DeLong via NANOG wrote:
> Meh… Turn off power supply input switch, open chassis carefully, apply
> high-wattage 1Ω resistor across capacitor terminals for 10 seconds.
>
If dealing with a charged capacitor, do not use a low resistance such as a
ohm. This is the same as
Didn't require any additional time at all when equipment wasn't bulky
enough to need rails in the first place
I've never been happy about that change.
On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 09:37:58AM -0700, Andrey Khomyakov wrote:
> Hi folks,
> Happy Friday!
>
> Would you, please, share your thoughts
> On Sep 24, 2021, at 3:35 PM, Niels Bakker wrote:
>
> * c...@cmadams.net (Chris Adams) [Sat 25 Sep 2021, 00:17 CEST]:
>> Which - why do I have to order different part numbers for back to front
>> airflow? It's just a fan, can't it be made reversible? Seems like that
>> would be cheaper
On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 1:34 PM Jay Hennigan wrote:
> On 9/24/21 09:37, Andrey Khomyakov wrote:
>
> > *So ultimately my question to you all is how much do you care about the
> > speed of racking and unracking equipment and do you tell your suppliers
> > that you care? How much does the time it
Once upon a time, Niels Bakker said:
> * c...@cmadams.net (Chris Adams) [Sat 25 Sep 2021, 00:17 CEST]:
> >Which - why do I have to order different part numbers for back to
> >front airflow? It's just a fan, can't it be made reversible?
> >Seems like that would be cheaper than stocking alternate
On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 3:36 PM Niels Bakker wrote:
> * c...@cmadams.net (Chris Adams) [Sat 25 Sep 2021, 00:17 CEST]:
> >Which - why do I have to order different part numbers for back to
> >front airflow? It's just a fan, can't it be made reversible? Seems
> >like that would be cheaper than
* c...@cmadams.net (Chris Adams) [Sat 25 Sep 2021, 00:17 CEST]:
Which - why do I have to order different part numbers for back to
front airflow? It's just a fan, can't it be made reversible? Seems
like that would be cheaper than stocking alternate part numbers.
The fan is inside the power
Once upon a time, William Herrin said:
> I care, but it bothers me less that the inconsiderate air flow
> implemented in quite a bit of network gear. Side cooling? Pulling air
> from the side you know will be facing the hot aisle? Seriously, the
> physical build of network equipment is not
Andrey Khomyakov wrote:
Hi folks,
Happy Friday!
Interesting tidbit is that we actually used to manufacture custom
rails for our Juniper EX4500 switches so the switch can be actually
inserted from the back of the rack (you know, where most of your
server ports are...) and not be blocked
I’ve seen Dell rack equipment leap for safety (ultimately very very
unsuccessfully…) in big earthquakes. Lots of rack screws for me.
-George
Sent from my iPhone
> On Sep 24, 2021, at 9:41 AM, Andrey Khomyakov
> wrote:
>
>
> Hi folks,
> Happy Friday!
>
> Would you, please, share your
On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 02:49:53PM -0500, Doug McIntyre wrote:
> You mention about hardware lockin, but I wouldn't trust Dell to not switch
> out the design on their "next-gen" product, when they buy from a
> different OEM, as they are want to do, changing from OEM to OEM for
> each new product
On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 09:37:58AM -0700, Andrey Khomyakov wrote:
> We selected Dell switches in part due
> to Dell using "quick rails'' (sometimes known as speed rails or toolless
> rails).
Hmm, I haven't had any of those on any of my Dell switches, but then
again, I haven't bought in in
Considering that the typical $5 pieces of bent metal list for ~$500 from most
vendors, can you imagine the price of fancy tool-less rack kits?
Brand new switch: $2,000
Rack kit: $2,000
-Randy
Of Andrey Khomyakov
Sent: September 24, 2021 12:38
To: Nanog
Subject: Rack rails on network equipment
This message was sent from outside of Sheridan College. Please be careful when
opening attachments, clicking links, or responding to requests for information.
Hi folks,
Happy Friday!
Would you
Hi,
In my opinion:
That time you take to rack devices with classic rail can be
viewed as a bounding moment and, while appreciated by the device, will
reducing downtime issues on the long run that you may have if you just
rack & slap 'em.
It is also Friday =D.
-
. The amount of time required to do the initial
install is insignificant in the grand scheme of things.
-richey
From: NANOG on behalf of
Andrey Khomyakov
Date: Friday, September 24, 2021 at 12:38 PM
To: Nanog
Subject: Rack rails on network equipment
Hi folks,
Happy Friday!
Would you
Andrey, hi.
The speed rails are nice, and are effective in optimizing the time it takes
to rack equipment. It's pretty much par for the course on servers today
(thank goodness!), and not so much on network equipment. I suppose the
reasons being what others have mentioned - longevity of service
On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 9:39 AM Andrey Khomyakov
wrote:
> Interesting tidbit is that we actually used to manufacture custom rails for
> our Juniper EX4500 switches so the switch can be actually inserted from the
> back of the rack (you know, where most of your server ports are...) and not
> be
> You mention a 25-minute difference between racking a no-tools rail kit and
> one that requires a screwdriver. At any reasonable hourly rate for someone
> to rack and stack that is a very small percentage of the cost of the
> hardware. If a device that takes half an hour to rack is $50 cheaper
On 9/24/21 09:37, Andrey Khomyakov wrote:
*So ultimately my question to you all is how much do you care about the
speed of racking and unracking equipment and do you tell your suppliers
that you care? How much does the time it takes to install or replace a
switch impact you?*
Very little. I
On Fri Sep 24, 2021 at 09:37:58AM -0700, Andrey Khomyakov wrote:
> As far as I know, Dell is the only switch vendor doing toolless rails
Having fought for hours trying to get servers with those
rails into some DCs racks I'd go with slightly slow but fits
everywhere
> *So ultimately my question
On 9/24/21 10:37 AM, Andrey Khomyakov wrote:
So ultimately my question to you all is how much do you care about the
speed of racking and unracking equipment and do you tell your suppliers
that you care? How much does the time it takes to install or replace a
switch impact you?
I was having a
We don’t care. We rack up switches maybe once or twice a year. It’s just not
worth the effort to streamline. If we were installing dozens of switches a
month, maybe. But personally I think it’s crazy to make rackability your
primary reason for choosing a switch vendor. Do you base your
Hi folks,
Happy Friday!
Would you, please, share your thoughts on the following matter?
Back some 5 years ago we pulled the trigger and started phasing out Cisco
and Juniper switching products out of our data centers (reasons for that
are not quite relevant to the topic). We selected Dell
45 matches
Mail list logo
