OOB core router connectivity wish list

Jared Mauch jared at puck.nether.net
Thu Jan 10 14:54:40 UTC 2013


On Jan 10, 2013, at 9:35 AM, Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists at gmail.com> wrote:

>> 
>>        - rs232: please no.  it's 2013.  I don't want or need a protocol which
>> was designed for access speeds appropriate to the 1980s.
> 
> I don't think you can get ethernet and transport out-of-the-area in
> some places at a reasonable cost, so having serial-console I think is
> still a requirement.

I think it does beg a few questions though:

Some of the POTS carriers are trying to jettison their equipment before the end of this decade.  In the absence of a modem + console server, I think that IP transport is going to become increasingly important for this function, but honestly - the vendors aren't mature in this space for core equipment.  Without the ability to access the removable media in the 2010 timeframe at boot time is a major oversight.  There is no consistent learning or 'continual improvement' in this space.

I tried to give some focus to this about a decade ago for one vendor and it led to interesting discussions at first, but it is often so low in acquisition priorities it doesn't show up.

Anyone dealing with modern servers will know of the experience with the few seconds to sync up to the VGA signal and how that can allow you to miss the "Press DEL/F1/F2/F8/F12" messages.  The modernization of equipment in this space has led to side-effects.  I'm … (wanted to say fearful, but…) concerned with what they will concoct given their independent thought at times.

Now that being said, the idea of an industry document may be something we can collaborate on as a group to list what doesn't work and why.  (e.g.: I think Roland is confusing ROMMON w/ management ethers.. these can be the same physical port, but not always).  

- Jared


More information about the NANOG mailing list