[c-nsp] Non Cisco SFP

[Howard, Christopher]

Agreed. We have all sorts of third party brand SFPs around here. 1G and
10G. You can buy both DOM capable or not. We've not had any problems out
of them.

Actually, this morning we swapped out an optic that died over night. It
was a Cisco branded one. :)

-Christopher



On 2/2/15, 12:56 PM, "Jared Mauch" <jared at puck.nether.net> wrote:

>
>> On Feb 2, 2015, at 11:46 AM, Warren Jackson <wrjack1971 at gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>> 
>> Sure, no problem!
>> 
>> 1)  Lack of Cisco support.  You will find yourself behind the
>>eight-ball dealing with the TAC if you have these in your chassis.
>>Sounds like a small deal, but I for one don't have the time to deal with
>>it.
>
>Sounds like you work for Cisco or were properly ingrained in their
>marketing thinking.
>
>> 2)  Cost.  If you buy through a Cisco gold provider then you are going
>>to get a good price on the optics, enough to where the difference pays
>>off in support, as these can been wrapped in through your smartnet
>>converage.  If you have optics from another vendor you are dealing with
>>their support and Cisco support, keeps things simple. Makes it worth
>>paying the bit extra you would pay.  We aren't talking about thousands
>>of dollars difference in price here.
>
>Not really.
>
>> 3)  Who?  Which SFP manufacturer(s) would you recommend besides Cisco?
>
>Finisar (for examples).
>
>> 4)  Several of the Cisco SFP's provide the show tranceiver telemetry
>>that aid in troubeshooting the physical layer, which you won't get with
>>the off-market brand tranceivers.
>
>Actually, not true, this is the problem I have with their first party
>optics.  We¹ve met with their TMG group several times and have
>outstanding software defects that are unresolved.
>
>
>> Just my 2 cents based on my experience.  How about the rest of you guys?
>
>We¹ve had great luck with 3rd party and better support for DOM than their
>first party optics.
>
>- Jared
>
>> 
>> -Warjack
>> 
>> On Mon Feb 02 2015 at 11:37:59 AM Jared Mauch <jared at puck.nether.net>
>>wrote:
>> 
>> > On Feb 2, 2015, at 11:16 AM, Gert Doering <gert at greenie.muc.de> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > On Mon, Feb 02, 2015 at 03:29:41PM +0000, Rick Martin wrote:
>> >> I am glad to see this thread, we are on the cusp of making the
>>plunge into aftermarket optics
>> >
>> > Whatever "aftermarket" optics are - I would not go and by *used*
>>optics,
>> > because that's about the only thing in modern hardware that truly
>>ages,
>> > aka "optics burn out over time".
>> 
>> Agreed, general use optics shouldn¹t cost you more than $300, and that
>>is being quite generous.
>> 
>> If you wanted to program your own optics, apparently you can get one of
>>these new raspberry pis:
>> 
>> 
>>http://eoinpk.blogspot.com/2014/05/raspberry-pi-and-programming-eeproms-o
>>n.html
>> 
>> It includes a link at the bottom for how to program the optics to be
>>Œcisco compatible¹.
>> 
>> - Jared
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>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/