[15811] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Building a NOC
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Nathan Stratton)
Sun Mar 22 13:38:35 1998
Date: Sun, 22 Mar 1998 13:15:16 -0500 (EST)
From: Nathan Stratton <nathan@robotics.net>
To: "Howard C. Berkowitz" <hcb@clark.net>
cc: Sean Donelan <SEAN@SDG.DRA.COM>, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <v03007825b13a859bc617@[168.143.1.215]>
On Sun, 22 Mar 1998, Howard C. Berkowitz wrote:
> Yes. And your consultant must know local practices as well. If you are
> building a facility in Fairfax County, Virginia (a major technology suburb
> of Washington DC), avoid, in your plans or anything the building inspector
> may see, the term "computer room." "Communications room," "network room,"
> etc., all prevent the problem: if they see "computer room," they will
> demand a mainframe-style central emergency power off control, which greatly
> increases electrical wiring cost.
What? That should not increase the cost at all, and is required in most
areas. All you need to do is get a shunt trip breaker and you are all set.
I was able to build my colo in Atlanta with the shunt trip off the main
600 Amp 3 Phase panel. In doing this the USP still protected the load, but
V/AC and lighting was shutoff. I think I spent $100 more for the shunt
trip. The breaker is what cost us the big bucks, but not as much as the
800 Amp 3 Phase breaker on the UPS output.
> I haven't looked at this recently, but another Fairfax County practice was
> if you used halon, regardless if the room was also sprinklered, you had to
> do a live test with halon before the inspector would approve it. The
Ya, and you had to hold the test for a specified time without any
air/halon leaking out. If you are building a new POP, HALON in ANY city is
not legal any more. The bad news is there are still a few major areas that
have not approved the HALON substitute. So you end up with a pre-action
water system with high temp heads.
--
Nathan Stratton Telecom & ISP Consulting
www.robotics.net nathan@robotics.net
