That exact scenario happened to us. We have a metal building on the top of a hill that is our distribution warehouse. They got a lightning hit one weekend and then on Monday I came in and the phone system was fried!
-----Original Message----- From: Glen Johnson [mailto:gjohn...@vhcc.edu] Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 1:48 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: facilities wiring question One other benefit that fiber has over copper that I see in this situation that no one else has mentioned. Electrical isolation. It could be that different floors get power from different electrical panels and transformers. A spike on one floor wont travel through fiber to another floor. My %dayjob% is on the top of a hill and this is something we always have to consider. Apparently we are a lightening magnet. It may or may not apply in this situation but is a consideration. -----Original Message----- From: John Cook [mailto:john.c...@pfsf.org] Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 1:22 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: facilities wiring question Which begs me to make a comment about non (or not for) profits. There are NPs out there that have huge budgets but that doesn't mean they have the sense to budget for proper IT functionality and there are those that operate on a shoestring but have the foresight to invest for the longterm. We're lucky enough to have a CIO and CEO that know the value that technology can bring when done right. They also understand this comes at a price and that often means making choices that compromise other areas. Infrastructure should always be designed to meet needs 3-5 years (or more) down the road, it's cheaper in the long run and a whole lot less stressful. We took on rolling out a VMWare datacenter 3 yrs ago not because it was cheaper to do so in that particular fiscal year but because it made sense in the long run. That being said, if he's going to be in the building more than a few years AND can get it budgeted fiber gives him some flexibility IMHO. John W. Cook Systems Administrator Partnership For Strong Families 315 SE 2nd Ave Gainesville, Fl 32601 Office (352) 393-2741 x320 Cell (352) 215-6944 Fax (352) 393-2746 MCSE, MCTS, MCP+I, A+, N+, VSP4, VTSP4 -----Original Message----- From: Mayo, Bill [mailto:bem...@pittcountync.gov] Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 12:52 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: facilities wiring question I don't have any desire to keep arguing with you, Ben, because I already know that it will just go on forever. I should just let it go, but, gosh, some of your comments are just mean-spirited (e.g. "are you just not paying attention"). I recognize you are a bright guy, and I agree with you more often than not. However, arguing that running copper between floors in a building is in any way as preferable as running fiber is just silly. I will again state that the OP may not have much of a choice based on how much money he has, but $200 (your numbers) is really not worthy of consideration in something as important as your network infrastructure. As for "good for me", the OP doesn't state how much money he does or doesn't have, he just indicates that he is working for a non-profit. And I never said that the PVC sheaths were "anything special", just that suggesting you have to handle a fiber pull more gingerly than you do a copper one is not accurate. In regards to "electrical interference" I am answering your query as to what advantages there are to fiber. I am not suggesting that he run a fiber link between floors because it has "some advantages", I am suggesting that because it is, quite frankly, the de facto standard for new buildings (just like running the current cat-x is). This isn't something I just dreamed up, it is a widespread best practice. Again the reason why you run fiber instead of copper or Wireless RF is because that's what the vast majority of modern networking equipment uses for connections of this type. I haven't seen a high-speed layer-3 switch with a Wireless RF interface on it, but please correct me if I'm wrong. Your $100 > $0 argument neglects to take into consideration that even utilizing a regular ethernet port on a switch has a cost. Eat up too many of those and then you have to buy another switch, which you will then need to connect to something. I understand the SNAFU part. What I am saying is that I have no way of knowing what his environment looks like outside of this particular problem. Apparently, you do. As for the miles across town, I am paying attention. Are you? You asked what benefits that fiber has over copper. I am explaining. And if you think your argument through, you might see the fallacy in saying he will just pull fiber between buildings. Another reason that you go fiber floor to floor is that if you have to bring fiber into the building, but the end device is on the 3rd floor, you just patch in. In your scenario, they have to pull all the way to the 3rd floor. And then someone will be unhappy with you when that device moves to the 4th floor and you have to re-run the whole thing. That fiber has more headroom is not just "semi-legitimate". The information that I have read indicates that the bandwidth potential of fiber is nearly limitless. I don't think anybody would make that argument for copper. It's just physics. Fiber costs continue to come down and to think that R&D in making faster and faster connections over cat-x is going to continue to keep pace with fiber is optimistic, to say the least. I'm sure that you will retort, but I am out of this "discussion". I apologize in advance if you take umbrage, just responding in your preferred tone. -----Original Message----- From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 12:08 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: facilities wiring question On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 11:31 AM, Mayo, Bill <bem...@pittcountync.gov> wrote: > ... we don't pay anybody any more to pull fiber than we do to pull copper. Pull, yes; terminate, no. (And pre-terminated bundles are more expensive still.) > ... we don't consider fiber to be a significant expense. Good for you. You're not the OP. > As for delicacy, individual fiber strands are more delicate, but you >don't run individual fiber strands floor to floor. You run a bundle >that has an exterior casing that is tougher than a cat-x cable. The PVC sheaths used for the cheaper fiber aren't anything special. Sure, you can get sturdier cable, armored even, or use innerduct. Cost higher again. > As has been mentioned elsewhere, it is also indifferent to electrical >interference ... Which is not an issue in this scenario. (Or all his copper home runs are screwed anyway.) Again, fiber has advantages over copper in some scenarios. Wireless RF has some advantages, too. Should he try and make a wireless link between his server room and his wiring closet, too? > The cost of a multi-mode fiber transceiver is not much at all. Anywhere from $100 to $300 (vs zero for UTP for most switches). $100 is NaN% more than $0, I believe. > You are making an assumption that this is the only connection the OP > has anywhere ... No, I'm not. The question is how do we get from the server room (floor 2) to the wiring closet on floor 3. There was a SNAFU that meant all the UTP runs that were supposed to go to floor 2 stopped on floor 3 instead. We're not running interconnect to other closets, or building a data center, or spanning buildings, or whatever. You can spin a scenario to give anything any advantage/disadvantage you want to anything. I'm working with the case in point. > What I know from experience is that just because you can't imagine > major changes in the future doesn't mean they aren't going to happen. If major changes happen, then he's going to be looking at rearchitecting his entire CPW infrastructure. The fiber run from floor 2 to floor 3 won't help him in that case. > While you may be able to match some speeds with copper ... His current needs could likely be met by a single 100 megabit run. Running CAT6A gives him the ability to grow to *at least* ten gig per cable. That is *10,000% headroom*. With two or three cables, he's future-proofed beyond belief. If his needs *that* much more bandwidth, it's very unlikely the rest of his CPW will be sufficient. > As for how flexible fiber is, I know that we can use our fiber >connections to run video signals miles across town. Are you just not paying attention? We're going 50 feet to a wiring closet one floor up. If he needs to go miles across town, then he'll install fiber between his server room and the place miles across town. That doesn't mean he should run fiber to every other place he has to run a comm line to. If there is a danger that his single wiring closet is going to suddenly move to a point a few files away, then yes, he should run fiber. > And if you need a lot of connections and a limited amount of space to > get that cable between floors ... Ibid. > As for "running just one cable", the point I am making is that the > kind of fiber cabling we are talking about comes bundled. Copper does not. So what? All that matters for our purposes is *cost*, not how they sell it. If four individual UTP cables cost $50 and a 6-stand fiber bundle costs $250 then fiber costs more. I don't care how the stock room accounts for it. > The difference here is that you are imagining that the OP has nothing > more than what is described in this particular situation ... I'm solving the problem at hand, not inventing scenarios that simply don't apply. > If he can afford fiber, he is better positioned for future needs than > he is if pulls copper. You keep making that assertion, but any attempt at explaining why doesn't apply to this scenario. Distance, bundle size, EMI, etc., are all irrelevant here. The closest you've come is pointing out that fiber has more bandwidth headroom, which is at least semi-legitimate, but given the current needs and the room to grow possible with UTP, I don't really think that's a convincing argument here. I have a limited ability to predict the future accurately given some scenarios. For example, I jump up into the air right now, I can predict with high accuracy that I will come back down. -- Ben ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: The information transmitted, or contained or attached to or with this Notice is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain Protected Health Information (PHI), confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, transmission, dissemination, or other use of, and taking any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient without the express written consent of the sender are prohibited. This information may be protected by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), and other Federal and Florida laws. Improper or unauthorized use or disclosure of this information could result in civil and/or criminal penalties. Consider the environment. Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to. ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.425 / Virus Database: 270.14.72/2511 - Release Date: 11/18/09 07:50:00 ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
