On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 16:09:04 +0000, Invisible wrote:

>>> Also, there's no possibility of reconfiguring the switches in any way.
>>> It will all be controlled from HQ.
>> 
>> Huh, so they'll be available 24x7 to support any issues?
> 
> Don't be ridiculous. ;-)
> 
> If it breaks, it's only a problem for the UK, and that's a low priority.

Perhaps before it breaks the first time, but not afterwards if my guess 
is right (which maybe it isn't).

>> If it were me,
>> I'd ask them.  Heck, the worst they can say is "yes", the best they can
>> say is "gee, maybe you should learn how to operate them in case we're
>> unavailable - or if the WAN is down" and you get a chance to learn
>> about these things - if anything, it's fodder for the CV.
> 
> Would be nice... However, based on my efforts to learn about the
> firewall configuration [which *is* nontrivial], I suspect I'll get
> nowhere.

Gotta start somewhere.  Conceptually, the firewall isn't going to be 
difficult - either pass traffic or don't based on some rules.  IOS' 
syntax isn't easy, but it's not difficult either - I used to manage a bit 
of Cisco equipment (as well as 3Com equipment; the Netbuilder routers 
were interesting) - but commands typed in are just syntax - once you 
learn the syntax, that's most of the battle.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
>> They are freaking reliable routing switches with world-reputation
>> support. Yes, that costs money.
> 
> That's true - but it's also true that the switches we've already got
> have run for 10 years without one single reliability issue.

The people at HQ also want to be sure that you'll run next 10 years the
same way - without problems and need to upgrade.

>> It makes the network more controllable and logical (or to be precise, it
>> makes getting the network more controllable and logical possible). And
>> it increases security, if made correctly.
> 
> I don't see it.
> 
> I mean, if we had one group of nodes that talk to each other and don't
> talk to anything else much, putting them onto a seperate subnet would
> make a lot of sense. But that isn't the case. We have 50 PCs and 4
> servers. All 50 PCs talk to the same 4 servers and the Internet. I fail
> to see how subnetting does *anything* in this situation other than
> adding unecessary complexity.

You'll probably have the servers on different subnet than the
workstations (basic categorizing). If you'll some day (or already, I
just don't think you do) have some slower link, you don't want the bits
to run via it, if not necessary.

And if the HQ is planning to get you all to one big firm-wide network,
it will ease up with subnets.

>> They are making theier job (and yours too) more stable. It's a bit more
>> work to configure the system and some work to maintain it, but it
>> reduces big problems.
> 
> Such as?

Categorizing, as I said. Servers in one place (just like physical),
workstations in another, active devices in third, etc.

>> And yes, I'd love to get Catalyst to be the base of my homenet. But
>> because of the price I'll probably have to just get 1800-series Procurve.
> 
> Your home network must be *much* bigger than mine. ;-)
> 
> [Mine has 3 nodes.]

No, not yet so much bigger. I just like to have the control (besides I
like IOS) ;).

http://www.zbxt.net/hw.php

-- 
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
   http://www.zbxt.net
      aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
>>> Also, there's no possibility of reconfiguring the switches in any way.
>>> It will all be controlled from HQ.
>>
>> Huh, so they'll be available 24x7 to support any issues?
> 
> Don't be ridiculous. ;-)
> 
> If it breaks, it's only a problem for the UK, and that's a low priority.

This would be a good time to bring it up with your boss, then. That *is* 
part of your job.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     It's not feature creep if you put it
     at the end and adjust the release date.

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 21:06:23 +0200, Eero Ahonen wrote:

> The people at HQ also want to be sure that you'll run next 10 years the
> same way - without problems and need to upgrade.

Most organizations don't plan that far out, because hardware depreciation 
is 3-5 years, and often times, hardware isn't even supported for 10 years.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson wrote:
> 
> Most organizations don't plan that far out, because hardware depreciation 
> is 3-5 years, and often times, hardware isn't even supported for 10 years.

You're right. But if hw upgrading doesn't go on (like it hasn't) quality
products are the best choice to get the possibility for long life.

> Jim


-- 
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
   http://www.zbxt.net
      aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 00:26:40 +0200, Eero Ahonen wrote:

> You're right. But if hw upgrading doesn't go on (like it hasn't) quality
> products are the best choice to get the possibility for long life.

True.  I would of course purchase the best quality product I could afford 
at the time.  There's also games with budgets that are served by 
overspending sometimes. :-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson wrote:
> because hardware depreciation is 3-5 years, 

... which has little to do with it ...

(Depreciation has nothing to do with how fast something wears out, even 
in theory.)

> and often times, hardware isn't even supported for 10 years.

There is that.

One of the reasons digital phones never really took off in the US is the 
federal government required AT&T to plan for equipment to last 30 to 50 
years when installed. Not a real short innovation cycle there.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     It's not feature creep if you put it
     at the end and adjust the release date.

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:

>>> Huh, so they'll be available 24x7 to support any issues?
>>
>> Don't be ridiculous. ;-)
>>
>> If it breaks, it's only a problem for the UK, and that's a low priority.
> 
> This would be a good time to bring it up with your boss, then. That *is* 
> part of your job.

If there's one thing I've learned by working here, it's that repeatedly 
pointing things out doesn't change deeply ingrained attitudes. :-(

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 22:17:50 -0800, Darren New wrote:

> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> because hardware depreciation is 3-5 years,
> 
> ... which has little to do with it ...
> 
> (Depreciation has nothing to do with how fast something wears out, even
> in theory.)

True, but it does have a lot to do with budgeting cycles.  That said, I'm 
currently using a laptop that's fully depreciated (and now out of 
warranty), got a second one that's so old I couldn't get parts for it, 
and a desktop that has so little memory and disk space I can't really use 
it for anything.  I don't know when we're slated for new equipment - 
probably when something breaks again.

>> and often times, hardware isn't even supported for 10 years.
> 
> There is that.
> 
> One of the reasons digital phones never really took off in the US is the
> federal government required AT&T to plan for equipment to last 30 to 50
> years when installed. Not a real short innovation cycle there.

True.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 09:13:21 +0000, Invisible wrote:

> Darren New wrote:
> 
>>>> Huh, so they'll be available 24x7 to support any issues?
>>>
>>> Don't be ridiculous. ;-)
>>>
>>> If it breaks, it's only a problem for the UK, and that's a low
>>> priority.
>> 
>> This would be a good time to bring it up with your boss, then. That
>> *is* part of your job.
> 
> If there's one thing I've learned by working here, it's that repeatedly
> pointing things out doesn't change deeply ingrained attitudes. :-(

It still wouldn't hurt to point it out.  Then when it happens, you can 
say "this is why I said I should be trained on this and be given access 
to actually fix it - sorry, you have to wait for the folks in the US to 
wake up."

Tell 'em in an e-mail, then you've got a written record of it.  Sounds 
like the kind of place I left when I went unemployed - if it ain't in 
writing, it didn't happen.  So write it down in an e-mail.

Jim

Post a reply to this message