that would mean the concept of patch by exception does not require patch panels and clearly even with that methodology it's used. Seems like some crack smoking logic there. I bet 90% of most peoples access layer has the same configuration on their switches.
I don't think scale has anything todo with it. Sounds more about margin, the cost of RU space and how close to the wind most SP are flying which, in-turns means paying engineers peanuts and doing whatever to bring the revenue in. Regards, Peter Tiggerdine GPG Fingerprint: 2A3F EA19 F6C2 93C1 411D 5AB2 D5A8 E8A8 0E74 6127 On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 2:08 PM, Paul Wilkins <paulwilkins...@gmail.com> wrote: > Because SPs have the luxury to not use structured cabling, due to scale > where all switch ports share a common configuration, so there's no need for > a patch panel, just patch direct to the switch, whereas in enterprise, > inadvertent swapping of ports leads to P1s, hence, structured cabling is > fairly ubiquitous. > > Kind regards > > Paul Wilkins > > On 4 October 2017 at 14:56, Sam Silvester <sam.silves...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 12:45 PM, Paul Wilkins <paulwilkins...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> There's enterprise racks, and SP racks and I'd say to generalise, >>> Enterprise do the ports to the front to structured cabling, while SPs will >>> reverse mount for shorter wire runs and density. Also swapping out reverse >>> mounted switches is a huge pain. >>> >> >> That's an interesting statement. What makes you say that? I've come across >> sites where the front to front (cold aisle) spacing of racks is greater than >> rear to rear (hot aisle), is that what you are getting at? >> >> Cheers, >> >> Sam >> > > > _______________________________________________ > AusNOG mailing list > AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net > http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog > _______________________________________________ AusNOG mailing list AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
