[176180] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: A case against vendor-locking optical modules
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (=?UTF-8?B?SsOpcsO0bWUgTmljb2xsZQ==)
Mon Nov 17 19:02:57 2014
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 01:02:42 +0100
From: =?UTF-8?B?SsOpcsO0bWUgTmljb2xsZQ==?= <jerome@ceriz.fr>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <6F314212-743E-4A2D-B0A2-B9D4FDA6098D@ianai.net>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Hello Patrick,
Le 18/11/2014 00:17, Patrick W. Gilmore a écrit :
> You like Arista for price, density, etc.? Then factor in the cost
> (OpEx & CapEx) of vendor-specific optics and see if they still make
> sense. Don't just look at the per-port cost of the blade. See, it's a
> simple business decision for you too.
You got my point : I do care about per-port cost, but the actual cost is
a composite of :
- kit price
- licences
- optics
- spare optics
- power per port over expected run time
- collocation space
> Besides, what's wrong with using something (as Nick mentioned) like
> FlexOptics programmable optics? Haven't tried it in Arista, but other
> kit works fine.
Programmable optics are fine, but then you'd have to keep your
programming gear available and train your techniciens on it, or keep
pre-coded spares for every locked manufacturers.
It's probably fine in a pure DC environment with few locations and only
one SFP+ type, but it's rapidly a total mess when you have to manage 40
channels for 3 module types over dozens of locations AND the added
manufacturer specific pain-in-the-ass.
--
Jérôme Nicolle
+33 6 19 31 27 14
