[108227] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: rackmount managed PDUs
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Nuno Vieira - nfsi telecom)
Thu Sep 25 12:50:46 2008
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 17:45:08 +0100 (WEST)
From: Nuno Vieira - nfsi telecom <nuno.vieira@nfsi.pt>
To: "Justin M. Streiner" <streiner@cluebyfour.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0809251117010.9452@whammy.cluebyfour.org>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Reply-To: Nuno Vieira - nfsi telecom <nuno.vieira@nfsi.pt>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
We use APANET powerswitches, and we are quite happy with them.
24 ports units, around 600 EUR per unit.
www.apanet.pl
---
Nuno Vieira
nfsi telecom, lda.
nuno.vieira@nfsi.pt
Tel. (+351) 21 949 2300 - Fax (+351) 21 949 2301
http://www.nfsi.pt/
----- "Justin M. Streiner" <streiner@cluebyfour.org> wrote:
> As much as I hate to tear people away from the Intercage/Atrivo
> debacle
> and semi-tangential rants, I'll take one for the team and do it :)
>
> I have an opportunity coming up to rebuild an existing machine room
> space
> to an extent. It's not a total gut-and-refit, but I'll at least get
> to
> put in some new infrastructure. That said, I'd be interested in
> hearing
> about peoples' experiences with various rackmountable managed PDUs.
>
> I have some Tripp Lite PDUMH30NETs that work well and are reasonably
> priced, but they have a few quirks (no RS-232 console port, web
> interface
> seems to be a little shaky with Firefox, etc) that would become more
> annoying when scaled up to several rows of new rack footprints. I'm
> also
> open to using managed vertically mounted PDUs. The plan is for each
> footprint to have "A" and B" feeds, so two PDUMH30NETs would take up
> 4U
> per footprint, which is a bit much...
>
> I don't need to worry about distributing DC power - just AC.
>
> This site will be lights-out most of the time, so robust remote
> management
> capabilities are a must.
>
> Any thoughts/insight are greatly appreciated.
>
> jms
