On Jan 10, 2013, at 9:51 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson <swm...@swm.pp.se> wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Jan 2013, Christopher Morrow wrote: > >>> - rs232: please no. it's 2013. I don't want or need a protocol >>> which >>> was designed for access speeds appropriate to the 1980s. >> >> I don't think you can get ethernet and transport out-of-the-area in >> some places at a reasonable cost, so having serial-console I think is >> still a requirement. > > I don't understand this argument. > > Are you connecting your CON directly to something that transports it > out-of-the-area? Modem? Yes, we have done this in a site with one device. > If you have a consolerouter there with T1 interface as link to outside world, > what's wrong with having ethernet port from that T1 router to the ethernet > OOB port on the router needing OOB access, instead of having RS232 port on > them. It's cheaper and easier to cable ethernet compared to RS232. RS232 has > much shorter cable length compared to ethernet (9600 reaches 20 meters or so). I certainly want to use something more modern, having run Xmodem to load images into devices or net-booted systems with very large images in the past… I've seen all sorts of creative ways to do this (e.g.: DSL for OOB, 3G, private VPLS network via outside carrier). It is a challenge in the modern network space. Plus I have to figure that 9600 modems are going to be harder to find as time goes by.. at some point folks will stop making them. - Jared
