I would agree.... so why do we pay to fix or to add
additional equipment to modify?
I guess I will hold off from anymore Netonix.
Mitch
On 03/25/2017 09:27 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
I would say yes.
-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/>
<https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL><https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb><https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions><https://twitter.com/ICSIL>
Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/>
<https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix><https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange><https://twitter.com/mdwestix>
The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/>
<https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp>
<https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From: *"Mitch Koep" <[email protected]>
*To: *[email protected]
*Sent: *Saturday, March 25, 2017 9:23:08 AM
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Fw: Netonix
Is this a design error that Netonix needs to correct?
> What is the lesser of two problems. Leaving a lot of expensive stuff
> unprotected or risk replacing a Netonix switch?
>
> Chuck McCown wrote:
>> I would not put any surge protection on Netonix period, top or
>> bottom. If it is POE and powered by a passive source you run a risk
>> of smoking it with any surge suppressor.
>> I have two devices designed, one is an ancillary fuse to put inline
>> with Netonix. The second is adding fusing to my surge protectors if
>> I can fit it in. The external in line fuse product is ready for
>> prototyping.
>> *From:* David Coudron
>> *Sent:* Saturday, March 25, 2017 7:35 AM
>> *To:* [email protected]
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Fw: Netonix
>>
>> We are also very interested in this topic. We will be building out
>> 10 new towers in the next few months, and will be making the change
>> to Netonix switches (we had previously used a different type of
>> switch). I the past we had put Transtector surge protectors on the
>> tower top and in the cabinet on the ground. From what you are saying
>> in thread, we should not plan on surge protectors in the cabinet, but
>> what is the recommended change for the tower top, if any?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> *David Coudron*
>>
>> [email protected]|*Mobile: *612-991-7474
>>
>> *Advantenon, Inc.
>>
*cid:[email protected]<http://www.linkedin.com/company/Advantenon>cid:[email protected]<http://www.twitter.com/Advantenon>cid:[email protected]<http://www.facebook.com/Advantenon>cid:[email protected]<http://blog.advantenon.com/>
>>
>> [email protected]|3500 Vicksburg Lane N, Suite 315, Plymouth, MN
>>
55447|www.advantenon.com<http://www.advantenon.com/>|*Phone:*800-704-4720|*Local:
>> *612-454-1545
>>
>> *From:*Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Chuck McCown
>> *Sent:* Saturday, March 25, 2017 8:29 AM
>> *To:* [email protected]
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Fw: Netonix
>>
>> If an impulse comes along and the surge suppressor clamps to ground,
>> you run the risk of smoking the Netonix POE transformer. It will not
>> protect itself against shorts.
>>
>> *From:*Josh Baird
>>
>> *Sent:*Saturday, March 25, 2017 7:23 AM
>>
>> *To:*[email protected]
>>
>> *Subject:*Re: [AFMUG] Fw: Netonix
>>
>> What exactly is the reason? We always run through your surge
>> protectors before connecting to Netonix.
>>
>>
>> On Mar 25, 2017, at 9:15 AM, Chuck McCown <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Bypass ALL surge suppressors that are connected to Netonix,
>> irrespective of manufacturer.
>>
>> *From:*[email protected]
>>
>> *Sent:*Saturday, March 25, 2017 5:41 AM
>>
>> *To:*[email protected]
>>
>> *Subject:*Re: [AFMUG] Fw: Netonix
>>
>> So we should now bypass all our APC-type surge suppressors that
>> are connected to Netonix?
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 11:26 PM, Chuck McCown <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> I am going to fix this little problem...
>>
>> Netonix will fix your port for something like $25
>>
>> *From:*Bill Prince
>>
>> *Sent:*Friday, March 24, 2017 8:56 PM
>>
>> *To:*[email protected]
>>
>> *Subject:*Re: [AFMUG] Fw: Netonix
>>
>> Yeah. We accidentally hooked up an AF24 through a Cambium
>> surge suppressor, and it fragged the port on the Netonix. We
>> were swapping from something else that had been on the cable,
>> and completely forgot that it was going through that surge
>> suppressor. Hard lesson learned.
>>
>> bp
>>
>> <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
>>
>>
>> On 3/24/2017 1:27 PM, Chuck McCown wrote:
>>
>> OK, had an exchange with Netonix today. It is just as
>> Matt Hoppes said. You short out their POE and it will blow
>> the Ethernet transformer.
>>
>> I really presumed they had circuitry like Forrest that
>> could detect and shut down in an over current situation.
>> They do have poly fuses which are slow to react and may
>> protect it from a very brief short, but longer shorts will
>> indeed harm the port feeding the transformer.
>>
>> So, Netonix is not active POE. I would say that on
>> passive POE a plain surge suppressor should not be used.
>> I am working some “non plain” surge suppressors now....
>> ;-) Stay tuned to this bat channel and a big thanks to
>> Matt for forcing me to learn something new. It was
>> painful, but I can do painful things when I have to.
>>
>> *From:*Chuck McCown
>>
>> *Sent:*Friday, March 24, 2017 10:01 AM
>>
>> *To:*[email protected]
>>
>> *Subject:*Re: [AFMUG] Netonix
>>
>> tnx
>>
>> *From:*Josh Luthman
>>
>> *Sent:*Friday, March 24, 2017 9:47 AM
>>
>> *To:*[email protected]
>>
>> *Subject:*Re: [AFMUG] Netonix
>>
>> chris.sisler
>>
>> ( A )
>>
>> netlinx.net <http://netlinx.net>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340 <tel:%28937%29%20552-2340>
>> Direct: 937-552-2343 <tel:%28937%29%20552-2343>
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 11:45 AM, Chuck McCown
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Anyone know the email for the guy that runs Netonix?
>>
>> No virus found in this message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com/email-signature>
>> Version: 2016.0.8007 / Virus Database: 4769/14180 - Release Date:
>> 03/24/17
>>
>
>
--
Mitch Koep
A Better Wireless
218-851-8689 cell
--
Mitch Koep
A Better Wireless
218-851-8689 cell
