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

[Martin Robinson]

Hi,

You can always use the PWR675-AC-RPS-N1, gives redundancy with out
having to move to cat4K 

Martin.

___________________________________________________

Martin Robinson
Network Hardware Resale, LLC 
Merchants Court 
Singaporestraat 66
1175 RA Lijnden
The Netherlands
www.networkhardware.com

Direct: +31 (0) 20 449 6927
Fax: +31 (0) 20 449 6923
martin at networkhardware.com 
AIM: martinNHR  

Network Hardware Resale 
"The World's Largest Resource for Pre-Owned and
Used CISCO Network Hardware"
__________________________________________________


-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Marko
Milivojevic
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 1:07 PM
To: Saku Ytti
Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Power Redundancy in 3550 or 3750?

>  ACK. This is I think most common grief about 3750/3550. And it
puzzles me,
> does someone actually buy cat4k only because of this? Since my
> argumentation is that people just bite the bullet, take the risk and
> do not buy a bigger box, so Cisco wouldn't loose anything by having
> models with dual AC/DC PSU's.

	I think they have finally realized this with 4948, which is what
good 
"small" service providser switch should be. I guess they will actually 
get it QUITE right with next model (absence of SFP/GBIC ports on 10G 
version is still confusing). I believe they would sell quite a few of 
these boxes if they shipped them with, say, 24/48 100 Mb/s fiber ports. 
It would be dream come true for many Metro service providers.

Marko.
_______________________________________________
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/