fiber switch for gig

Wed Apr 2 02:04:06 UTC 2008

I have one of these.

http://www.netgear.com/Products/Switches/Layer3ManagedSwitches/GSM7328FS.aspx

Relatively inexpensive, and works happily with Cisco or OEM GBICs. I've 
always had good success working with their engineering folks for feature 
requests and troubleshooting. My main gripe is there is no good RPS 
option for it right now.

Are you running the fiber connections as GigE, or 100FX? Are they L2 or 
L3 routed connections?

Andrew Staples wrote:
> Speaking of running gig long distances, does anyone on the list have
> suggestions on a >8 port L2 switch with fiber ports based on personal
> experience?  Lots of 48 port gig switches have 2-4 fiber uplink ports, but
> this means daisy-chains instead of hub/spoke.  Looking for a central switch
> for a star topography to home fiber runs that is cost effective and works.
>
> Considering:
> DLink DXS-3326GSR
> NetGear GSM7312
> Foundry SX-FI12GM-4
> Zyxel GS-4012F
>
> I realize not all these switches are IEEE 802.3ae, Clause 49 or IEEE 802.3aq
> capable.
>
> Andrew
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-nanog at merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog at merit.edu] On Behalf Of
> Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu
> Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 5:06 PM
> To: Michael Loftis
> Cc: frank at dticonsulting.com; michael.dillon at bt.com; nanog at merit.edu
> Subject: Re: cooling door
>
> On Tue, 01 Apr 2008 16:48:47 MDT, Michael Loftis said:
>
>   
>> Yeah except in a lot of areas there is no MAN, and the ILECs want to 
>> bend you over for any data access.  I've no idea how well the MAN idea 
>> is coming along in various areas, but you still have to pay for access 
>> to it somehow, and that adds to overhead.  Which leads to attempt 
>> efficiency gains through centralization and increased density.
>>     
>
> I doubt we'll ever see the day when running gigabit across town becomes cost
> effective when compared to running gigabit to the other end of your server
> room/cage/whatever.
>
>
>   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20080401/7a1354bd/attachment.html>