[j-nsp] Sources for SFP+ optics

[Jonas Frey (Probe Networks)]

The best thing nowadays is to get an eeprom programmer and do all this
stuff yourself, this is what we do. 
This way you are flexible with 3rd party optics. You just buy a bunch of
XFPs/SFP/SFP-P's with generic firmware and identifiers and programm the
rest yourself for whatever device you are running which has
"vendor-locking".

No reason to have exactly the same xFP hardware several times in stock
just to have it work with different devices.

Dont get me wrong, if i want something to be 100% officially supported
(or the project requires it) we buy the optics from the vendor. 

But i dont see any reason to pay $1500 each time for a 10G SFP+ LR optic
when i can buy this from one of the larger SFP vendors for less than
$80.

-Jonas


Am Donnerstag, den 23.02.2012, 08:27 -0800 schrieb Bill Blackford:
> heh,
> 
> ok, I shouldn't post something I'm clearly not prepared to provide
> empirical data for. This is what I've heard and I've certainly
> experienced results that support this notion.
> 
> :)
> 
> -b
> 
> 
> On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 8:16 AM, Saku Ytti <saku at ytti.fi> wrote:
> > On (2012-02-23 06:38 -0800), Bill Blackford wrote:
> >
> >> Several manufacturers, like Finisar, MRV, etc. send the units that
> >> test well to Juniper, Cisco, etc. The ones that don't pass well, go to
> >> third-parties. Alos, if they are surplus and used, they could be
> >> dirty.
> >
> > {{Citation needed}}
> >
> > --
> >  ++ytti
> > _______________________________________________
> > juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
> 
> 
> 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/juniper-nsp/attachments/20120223/b50ddfc8/attachment.sig>