[114220] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: DSX cross-connect solution
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Chatfield, Terry)
Mon May 4 17:39:34 2009
Date: Mon, 4 May 2009 17:37:00 -0400
In-Reply-To: <op.utfcczydtfhldh@rbeam.xactional.com>
From: "Chatfield, Terry" <Terry.Chatfield@neustar.biz>
To: <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Alternatively, one could use a digital cross-connect.
Terry
-----Original Message-----
From: Ricky Beam [mailto:jfbeam@gmail.com]=20
Sent: Monday, May 04, 2009 5:23 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: DSX cross-connect solution
On Mon, 04 May 2009 16:05:30 -0400, Wallace Keith =20
<kwallace@pcconnection.com> wrote:
> I would stick with wire wrap, 66 blocks make an inferior connection.
True, but a 66 block will work. Usually. And is easily re-punched.
> If someone cannot deal with wire wrapping, they are not living in a
> telecom world.
Really. Seriously, who cannot do wire wrap? It takes, literally, 5 =20
minutes to learn to do it. And that's with a "screw driver" wirewrap =20
tool. With one of these =20
[http://www.datacomtools.com/catalog/Wire-Wrap-tools/jonard-wire-wrap-gu
n.htm], =20
it takes about 10s, and you get a consistent, near perfect wrap every =20
time. (yes, it's a bit pricey, but very worth the cost even if you only
use it once to wire a single panel.)
--Ricky
PS: That's just the gun; it'll need a tip/sleeve. I recommend a
complete =20
kit. =20
[http://www.datacomtools.com/catalog/Wire-Wrap-tools/wire-wrap-kits.htm]
