[149317] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Console Server Recommendation
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Frank Bulk)
Wed Feb 1 13:17:17 2012
From: "Frank Bulk" <frnkblk@iname.com>
To: "'Christopher O'Brien'" <obriapqz@bc.edu>,
<nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <4F29614A.6050307@bc.edu>
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2012 12:15:53 -0600
Reply-To: frnkblk@iname.com
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
We use WTI, too, just don't like it that it reboots to apply a change.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: Christopher O'Brien [mailto:obriapqz@bc.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2012 9:59 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Console Server Recommendation
On 1/30/12 11:08 AM, Ray Soucy wrote:
> What are people using for console servers these days? We've
> historically used retired routers with ASYNC ports, but it's time for
> an upgrade.
>
> OpenGear seems to have some nice stuff, anyone else?
>
I've been using Western Telematic TSM-40 console servers and have been
very happy with the price point and feature set.
Also, I aggregate console connections from different parts of my campus
over my existing fiber plant using TC Communications TC1880 Async Fiber
MUXs. This combination has served me well.
