OOB core router connectivity wish list
bill at herrin.us
Thu Jan 10 16:18:00 UTC 2013
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 1:24 AM, Randy Carpenter <rcarpen at network1.net> wrote:
>> On Wed, 9 Jan 2013, Randy Carpenter wrote:
>> > My main requirements would be:
>> > 1. Something that is *not* network (ethernet or otherwise) (isn't
>> > that the point of OOB?)
>> I don't understand this at all. Why can't an OOB network be ethernet
>> based towards the equipment needing management?
> How do I connect to it from many miles away when the network is
> down? I have connected to a misbehaving border device at a
> remote network via dial-up before, and was able to get it back
> up and running. I would not have been able to do that if the
> only options were ethernet or ethernet.
Dial up with PPP and then cross the ethernet? Drop off a cellular
modem with IP service instead of a dialup modem? Perhaps you haven't
noticed but IP over circuit-switched voice lines is giving way to
voice over IP packet switched systems. That POTS line the dialup modem
needs doesn't have a lot of future left.
> But having a console->serial is significantly less complex than
> console->IP_Stack->ethernet. So many more things to go
> wrong. I've never had a device that had a faulty serial port. I
> have seen numerous faulty or misbehaving network ports.
I've had faulty serial consoles more than once but that's beside the
point. Yes, ethernet-based OOB is more complex than a simple serial
console. It's also a lot more effective. At this point the server
vendors have gotten it down to a science where it's just as reliable
and not especially expensive. Time I'd say for the big iron router
vendors to follow suit.
William D. Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com bill at herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
More information about the NANOG