[c-nsp] Power Redundancy in 3550 or 3750?

[Adam Griffiths]

<rant>
 
I'd like to add that that the RPS675 "solution" requires somebody
onsite to actually press the button on the front of the RPS to swap
from RPS to internal supply.
 
This is not an ideal solution if you are using these switches in
remote locations, for instance in the basement of a building, or in a
mobile hut a 100km out of a capital city.

</rant>


> On 7/29/05, Andrew Fort <afort at choqolat.org> wrote:
> > Jan Friedel wrote:
> > >   Check the RPS675 solution.
> >
> > <friday afternoon rant>
> > 'Solution' is a strong word for the RPS675. :-)
> >
> > Unfortunately, it's a bit of a joke.  You waste an additional 1RU per
> > device you want redundant power for -- why?  Because the RPS is designed
> > to protect against power supply unit failure, not power supply failure;
> > i.e., if you plug in more than one device to the RPS, and lose mains
> > power, only one of the devices attached to the (usually 5 or 6) power
> > sockets will receive power.
> >
> > So, although it's the only solution to Skeeve's problem, it's a space
> > eater when you really just want another power supply that you attach to
> > UPS as opposed to raw power.
> >
> > Also, when you switch from RPS back to mains, the switch will power
> > cycle; so power outages still require an outage, just that you get to
> > choose when it'll be.  Rumor is that this is a design flaw.
> >
> > </friday afternoon rant>
> >
> > -andrew
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
> >
>