[c-nsp] VSS w/non sup VSL

[Graham Wooden]

On 6/18/11 4:32 PM, "Andrew Miehs" <andrew at 2sheds.de> wrote:

> On Saturday, June 18, 2011, Graham Wooden <graham at g-rock.net> wrote:
> 
>> I wouldn't assume that if a SUP-based VSL link fails that it's the SUPs
>> fault.  It depends on your environment; our campus (a dirty manufacturing
>> complex), we are constantly fighting SM fiber strand issues all the time.
> 
> I think the issue being described was whether it makes sense to use an
> additional module to provide the second vsl connection.

That was not what I was commenting on ... I was going by Scott's comment of:

"Our thought is that if the sup based VSL fails ... odds are high (100% ?)
that the sup itself failed and the box would be dead anyway "