Conference netcad::hub_mgnt

    I've never heard of such a proposal. I'd suggest sending some
    mail to either Jack Forrest (NAC::FORREST), or maybe Karl Pieper
    (DELNI::PIEPER), and ask the same question.
    
    Bob-who-worked-on-the-900EF-design-team
    

    
    Yes, Virginia, there will be a fo DECswitch 900EF. It was said that one
    would be done at the Americas NPB Sales & Marketing kickoff meeting.

    <----RE: last couple......
    What I *have* heard is that there will be a 6 port fiber optic bridge 
    based on the PEswitch 900TX hardware as a starting point not the
    900EF. IE: the 6 TP ports would be replaced with 6 Ethernet fiber optic 
    ports, with FDDI out the back as in the PEswitch 900TX. I'm not 100% 
    sure whether the front FO ports will be FOIRL compatible or not (I'm 
    presuming they will be). The rest of the architecture I am not aware of 
    what has been cast in concrete. Thus my comments of this proposed bridge 
    being based on the 900EF with FDDI out the front (and back) and some other 
    mix of FO Ethernet (as described above), I don't think is quite on the
    mark. However, someone may possibly have proposed the latter version
    to test the waters.....who knows.
    
    Bob

    
    A PEswitch with fo is essentially worthless to us in the field. If we
    could get both a fo PE & 900EF, great. Otherwise, a fo PE won't be very
    saleable from what my customers need. So, Bob, if you can feed that
    back, please do. Otherwise, I've sent many messages to the palace with
    my needs for a fo 900EF.

    If its the limit of 64 network addresses on the Ethernet side
    (of the current PEswitch) that bothers you, that would likely be 
    one of the first things that would be changed to what the EF for 
    example supports. I haven't personally seen your inputs on
    what you'd like to see in a FO 900EF equivalent, so I'm a little
    fuzzy as to where you see the holes.
    The "palace" is a big place, so I'm not sure which noble-person
    you may have sent your inputs to. :-)
    Ted, Feel free to elucidate in here as to what you mean by being 
    "worthless to us in the field".
    
    Bob 

    
    It is the 64 address limit which makes it "worthless". I had heard
    rumors that this was changeable, but never have seen any other real
    data on that. So, if the PEswitch can be "liberated" to support 8192
    addresses, then an adaptation of the PEswitch from UTP to FO is
    perfectly acceptable. 
    
    If I get a PEswitch with FO & 8192 address, I'd sell 100 tommorrow. So,
    get that soldering iron out...

    I also know that a FO PEswitch would be *next-to* useless.  Very few
    networks have implemented fiber to the desktop. An FOIRL-compliant EF would
    go a long way to ease the pain of installing a DEC switch as the heart
    of a mid-sized network.  Many companies have installed fiber runs to
    their remote concentrators and interfacing the existing EF to that type
    of wiring infrastructure is problematic to say the least.
    
    I just asked another NPC here which he would prefer and he said that
    it's a "no brainer" that an FO EF would be the choice to make.
    
    Brian Pituley
    NPC, Calgary
    
    PS:  Yes it is the limited address space of the PE switch's ethernet
    side that is the worry.  Why would the powers-that-be remove the
    possibility of using a FO switch stand-alone by removing the front panel
    FDDI connectors????
    

    Bob & others - rest assured the F/O work underway is on the
    EF not the TX.  No announced schedule as far as I know, contact
    Mike Soha if you need an estimate.
    
    Anil

    I think we can use EF or TX both with 900 FP to implement a SIX FIBER
    Ethernet. It is useless to add fiber to the front panel. If it is done,
    I think it will very expensive.
    
    The more I like is FDDI switch between Fast Ethernet.
    How about PE2000 series?
    I was heard something about it,it is great. But they have no Fast
    Ethernet as plan?!
    
    Tyrone

    
    Tyrone,
    
    	Yes we need Fast Ethernet before the PE2000 family is available. It
    would be nice if we could offer a PEswitch or DECswitch 900EF with one
    or two 100Mb Ethernet ports. Customers want 100BaseTX for their servers
    or a limited number of stations. I'm not an engineer, but what would it
    take to make one of these ports 10/100 to fill the gap until the PE2000
    switches become available.
    
    In addition, if we could pair this with a reworked PortSwitch 900TP or
    DECrepeater 90TS with Fast Ethernet, we could fill in the blanks with a
    100BaseTX solution so we don't lose deals. 
    
    We are going to lose deals because of this and FDDI won't be the
    answer.

    re:2557.9
    
    A 900FP is 6K plus the cost of a 900MS(4K)=10K to provide F/O
    connectivity. There's applications where existing stackables
    are connected with a fiber riser. Putting in a GIGAswitch to
    connecting remote stand alone 900EF's fits well.

RE: .9 and .11

...plus, just adding a DEChub 900 and PORTswitch 900FP on the back
of 900EF limits you to 6, count'em 6 ethernets.

8 out of 10 DEChub configurations I've been asked to do in the last
months have been for medium/large fiber ethernet (with maybe some FDDI
in the middle) that fan out to always over 6 remote sites. Usually
8, 12, 15, you name it. The customer always wants to have each remote
site be it's own segment. We simply can't do that!

And I'd like to assure the the IP and multiple protocol routing options
are available like to 900EE/EF. This cannot be a level 2 switch like
the 900TX. 8192 addresses and Routing!

If I had to trade something off, I'd give up the front panel FDDI 
ports. That same DEChub that would be the center of a star will 
either have FDDI on the backplane only and/or if they have external
FDDI they would likely (not always) get a concentrator anyway. Since
the front panel EF ports aren't MOD PMD, you're forced to a concentrator
anyway in alot of configs. For standalone "fo 900EF"'s, you got the back 
panel ports of the DEChub ONE-MX.
 

    HI,                 
    
    If you deserately need the FO EF or EE 900 modules, the DECswitch 400
    is a very good choice. Because it has every Ethernet media choice,
    such as AUI,BNC,UTP,Fiber, you use flexibility of it. Also it has lots
    of ethernet segment,I am sure it can provide 18 Fiber ethernet segment.
    
    I don't know if our FO products can exceed 2 KM, because lots of my
    case exceed 2 KM. SO the only thing I can propose is that FDDI.
    And our DECswitch 400 don't offer Single-mode Fiber,only FDDI is the
    choice.
    
    I also want to claim that I desperately need our 100BaseT
    information.Where can I find it?
    
    Tyrone
    

    
    No, if you need a FO DECswitch 900EF, the DECswitch 400 is NOT the
    product you want. That is because Digital will NOT be selling the FDDI
    uplink for this product at this time. 
    
    However, if all you need is a FO DECswitch 900EE, then the DECswitch
    400 IS the product of choice.