[c-nsp] RPS 675 question

[Colin Whittaker]

Hi Brad,

We do this all the time. Works fine. 
What is also quite common is placing the main power on a UPS and leaving
the RPS on raw power just to protect against UPS failure etc.

Things are not rosy in the world though. The RPS is designed to protect
against PSU failure and is pretty bad at most other tasks which you
think it would be usefull for.
In the event of power to the switch psu failing the switch psu goes
offline and the rps takes over as you would expect.
However once power is restored to the switch PSU it does not come back
online. This is not the end of the world as it has saved you an
unplanned outage and you can schedule a reboot of the device to have the
PSU become active once more.
However this reboot can't be invoked remotely it needs to be triggered
by pressing the button on the front of the RPS to put it back into
standby mode. Which means sending someone to the site. 

Colin
On Tue, Jan 23, 2007 at 11:14:33AM -0800, Brad Beck wrote:
> Does anyone here have operational experience with the RPS675?  I'm working on a design and would like to use this device, but am nervous about the installation guide statement which states something like: "the RPS must be attached to the same power source as the internal switch power supply.  If not, random resets may occur".
> 
> This suggests to me that the RPS and the switch must be attached to the same AC circuit, but this isn't clearly spelled out.  I'd be interested in hearing about any deployments where the RPS and switch(or whatever) were attached to seperate AC circuits.
> 
> 
> thanks.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
> 

-- 
Colin Whittaker						+353 (0)86 8211 965
http://colin.netech.ie				   colin@(magnet|netech).ie