[c-nsp] power requirement for sup720 migration

[nick.nauwelaerts at thomson.com]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Daniel Suchy [mailto:ds at nix.cz] 
> Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 16:01
> To: Nauwelaerts, Nick (TCM)
> Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] power requirement for sup720 migration
> 
> 
> On 11/16/2006 03:40 PM, nick.nauwelaerts at thomson.com wrote:
> >> Isn't he affected with bug with incorrect EEPROM programing on some
> >> 6748? See document at
> >> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/switches/ps708/products
> >> _field_notice09186a00802861e1.shtml
> >>
> >> BR
> >> Dan
> >>
> >> On 11/16/2006 03:11 PM, Gert Doering wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Nov 16, 2006 at 09:17:31AM +0100, 
> >> nick.nauwelaerts at thomson.com wrote:
> >>>> It doesn't even have to be a module based blade:
> >>>> 10   WS-X6748-GE-TX      277.62  6.61   277.62  6.61  on    on
> >>>> 11   WS-X6748-GE-TX      325.50  7.75   325.50  7.75  on    on
> >>>>
> >>>> 10 is a version 1.2 card, 11 is a version 2.2 card.
> >>> Interesting to see the more recent card draw *more* power.
> > 
> > Nope,
> > We're getting the correct -7A:
> > 
> >   (FRU is 'CEF720 48 port 10/100/1000mb Ethernet')
> >   OEM String = 'Cisco Systems'
> >   Product Number = 'WS-X6748-GE-TX'
> >   Serial Number = 'SAL********'
> >   Manufacturing Assembly Number = '73-9399-03'
> >   Manufacturing Assembly Revision = 'A0'
> >   Hardware Revision = 2.2
> >   Current supplied (+) or consumed (-) = -7.00A
> > 
> 
> But this your "show" output is for module in slot 11 (revision you
> reported match that slot), which reports correct value (and I 
> have same
> here). What says module in slot 10?

Ah yes, I thought high power usage reporting was the issue, seems it's
low power usage ;) Those modules do indeed give an incorrect rating.
Thanks for the heads up, one more item to add to my todo list.

// nick