[c-nsp] Cheap 10G between 7600 and Procurve 5406zl

[Christopher.Marget at usc-bt.com]

> >>> These days you can get cheap twinax 10G cables with SFP

> they are currently unsupported on N7K for good reasons that are
> technical.  strongly suggest that you don't use it for a production
> environment.

> > They seem to work fine in this application, however.
> 
> suggest you do "shut" on one side of the link and see if the other end
> notices the link is down.

Interesting, thanks for the details on this.  I've been frustrated by the lack of support for this module, and am glad to hear there's something to it, and not just an oversight (or worse, a marketing maneuver).

...not frustrated enough to try to save $1500 US on the link between $500,000 boxes by running an unsupported module, mind you!  But I did try it in the lab.

> > There's no problem using a Cisco SFP+ cable in an HP *server*
> 
> depends on the 'server'.
> for a NIC/CNA - yes.

That was my application.

> > http://www.networkworld.com/reviews/2010/011810-ethernet-switch-
> test.html
> >
> > One of the documents linked from the review was the vendor features
> questionnaire.  In it, Cisco said:
> >
> >     Nexus 5000 also provides interoperability support for non-Cisco
> >     Twinax cabling.  Supported vendors include EMC, IBM, HP
> StorageWorks
> >     and NetApp
> >
> > This, and an emailed promise from an HP rep are the only inter-vendor
> twinax support claims I've seen to date.  I'm hopeful that vendors will
> come to their senses on pluggables, at least for twinax cabling.
> 
> HP are currently locking in to HP transceivers.  email promise or not,
> thats the current behaviour.

Can you shed any light on Cisco's stance on the matter?  From the Cisco side we have:

Rumor-quality details from the Network World N5K test indicating support for some vendors in the N5K.

No support for Cisco's own twinax in the N7K.

The OP wanting to use an HP cable in Sup720 with a OneX adapter.

No LRM SFP+ optics.