Re: [asterisk-users] Is Asterisk really good??
Steve Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On Sun, 13 Apr 2008, Jay R. Ashworth wrote: >> On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 01:40:44PM -0700, Steve Edwards wrote: >>> I'd be interested in sections like "Rolling out a new server" or "How we >>> maintain all the little configuration files without losing our sanity." >> I smell a magazine article. :-) >That works, but I'm impatient. I'm up for "peer review" before >publication. >> The answer to the second question is likely going to become "rsync or >> cfengine", but I haven't gotten that far yet... and we don't change >> them all that much anyway. VICIdial has *lots* of knobs. >I'm mainly interested in "consistency" in configuration. The "method" has >to be sophisticated enough to handle "this box has 2 Ethernet interfaces >so I should configure OpenSER and Asterisk to listen to both IP addresses >on ports 5060 and 5061 respectively." This would preclude rsync. Why do you think that that would preclude rsync? -- /"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia \ / ASCII ribbon campaign | Great minds discuss ideas; X against HTML mail | Average minds discuss events; / \ and postings | Small minds discuss people. -- Eleanor Roosevelt ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Quiet 24 port POE gig switch
Ian Cowley wrote: >Beware PoE switches that can't handle Class 3 (15W) on all ports. >Most have fans because 24 (or 48) x 15W is hot! That's the power supplied .. which'd be at the far end of the wire. The efficiency of the PSU plays a big part in the heat dissipation. The push to compact dimensions doesn't help ... a 400W or thereabouts PSU with 24 independent outputs in 1U height? I suppose if the switch were quite deep it could be workable and quiet. The problem isn't simply of being "fanless". But being quiet. Preferably below 32 dBA at 1 metres for most offices. You can do that by using fans other than the tiny, whiney, 40mm fans that vibrate at 6000 to 18,000 Hz. A couple of 80 or 120 mm muffin fans at the back or front, pushing air in (hence the deep dimensions), but the top and bottom would need recesses to allow sufficient airflow when the positions above and below are filled. -- /"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia \ / ASCII ribbon campaign | Religion is regarded by the common people X against HTML mail | as true, by the wise as false, and by the / \ and postings | rulers as useful. -- Seneca the Younger ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Quiet 24 port POE gig switch
Steve Underwood wrote: >Gordon Henderson wrote: >> On Mon, 2 Feb 2009, Steve Underwood wrote: >>> Bernd Felsche wrote: >>>> Ian Cowley wrote: >>>>> Beware PoE switches that can't handle Class 3 (15W) on all ports. >>>>> Most have fans because 24 (or 48) x 15W is hot! >>>> That's the power supplied .. which'd be at the far end of the wire. >>>> The efficiency of the PSU plays a big part in the heat dissipation. >>>> The push to compact dimensions doesn't help ... a 400W or >>>> thereabouts PSU with 24 independent outputs in 1U height? I suppose >>>> if the switch were quite deep it could be workable and quiet. >>>> >>>> The problem isn't simply of being "fanless". But being quiet. >>>> Preferably below 32 dBA at 1 metres for most offices. >>>> >>>> You can do that by using fans other than the tiny, whiney, 40mm fans >>>> that vibrate at 6000 to 18,000 Hz. A couple of 80 or 120 mm muffin >>>> fans at the back or front, pushing air in (hence the deep >>>> dimensions), but the top and bottom would need recesses to allow >>>> sufficient airflow when the positions above and below are filled. >>> So, size does matter after all. :-) >>> 24 x 15W => 360W. Its not that big a supply really, and spread >>> across a 1U case its not that dense a supply. A 360W desktop PC >>> supply can be pretty quiet, so its sad none of the 1U chassis >>> supplies are. Probably if they used a large impeller fan they >>> could get the noise down. I guess they assume these things will >>> be in cupboards or data centres where nobody cares. This is a >>> poor assumption. >> I think you might be missing what Bernd Felsche wrote - 24 * 15W >> is indeed 360W, but the power supply will not be dissipating that >> - the phones at the far-end will. A modern switched mode PSU >> ought to be more than 90% efficient, so that means the PSU should >> only be dissipating 30 watts or so. Easy enough to keep cool with >> little or no fans. Same for those PC PSUs - the PSUs themselves >> really shouldn't be dissipating that much power (as heat). I >> suspect some early PSU makers just put fans in "because". >I think you definitely are missing what I wrote. I said its a 360W power >supply, which it is. Its dissipation should be comparable with a 360W PC >supply, though the per port power control will add a bit to the total >dissipation. >Very few supplies are >90% efficient, and they only hit their peak >efficiency at some magic load settings. An efficiency of 70-80% is far >more likely. Try looking at some specs for PC supplies. The PoE switches tend to use better than the cheapest-available technology. 90% is fairly easy to achieve except at the bottom end of the load capacity range ... i.e. when power drawn is only a few percent of the rated capacity. Efficiency can vary significantly, depending on load. The other point which I made, in addition to the 360W being dissipated by the appliances, is that there is a power supply for each PoE port. Each independently-regulated and and current limited, commonly even under software control as is seems that most of these sorts of switches are managed/managable. All of them appear to sense automatically if the connected appliance requires PoE. Even without being gigabit speed at each PoE port, the independent PSU per port alone increases the heat dissipation; probably in the order of half to one watt per port; within the switch. The designers of the switches seem to be able to incorporate all sorts of clever tricks in their management interfaces. But most don't automatically control the fans according to the temperature. -- /"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia \ / ASCII ribbon campaign | Religion is regarded by the common people X against HTML mail | as true, by the wise as false, and by the / \ and postings | rulers as useful. -- Seneca the Younger ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Quiet 24 port POE gig switch
"Wilton Helm" wrote: >>A modern switched mode PSU ought to be more than 90% efficient, >In theory, yes, in practice, not likely. It is harder to get high >efficiency from an isolated supply than a non-isolated one. I get ads >from IC manufacturers all the time about there 90 to 95% efficient >solutions, but these are boost or buck regulators--non-isolated. State >of the art in commercial practice for isolated supplies is around 80 to >85%, and typical commercial practice is more like 70 to 80%. The per-port regulators would be non-isolated. Probably feeding off an internal 48V bus. >Now you >have more like 60 watts of heat radiating from this power supply. Go >stick a 60 watt light bulb (incandescent) in a small metal box and see >how easy it is to keep cool. Well, the bulb has a peak permissible operation temperature of about 160 degrees C ... so likely no extra cooling required. :-) -- /"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia \ / ASCII ribbon campaign | Religion is regarded by the common people X against HTML mail | as true, by the wise as false, and by the / \ and postings | rulers as useful. -- Seneca the Younger ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Quiet 24 port POE gig switch
Singer XJ Wang wrote: >Honestly, how are you guys expecting a 24 Port POE to be fanless? >Lets start with some logical points here: >1) 24 Ports x 15.4W/Port = 369.4Watts + Switch Power = ~400Watts... now >Power Supply isn't that efficient so you're getting probably a 500Watt >Power Supply (assuming 80%)... It'd still be a 400W PSU if it supplies 400W. >2) with a 1U chassis, you can't blow air up or down... only front and >back.. so you're stuck with a 40mm fan.. And the sides... ... you can fit a muffin fan horizontally as suggested and allow it to draw in or to blow air at the top or botton within the height of the 1U. Muffin fans are 25 to 35 mm "high". Placed "centrally", the fans can draw in air from around the port connectors on the front panel (if the back-end of the connectors is sealed!) and blow into the PSU, exiting at the back. This also helps to reduce the little fan noise that remains, leaving mostly white noise from the air flow itself (unless you install whistles). -- /"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia \ / ASCII ribbon campaign | Religion is regarded by the common people X against HTML mail | as true, by the wise as false, and by the / \ and postings | rulers as useful. -- Seneca the Younger ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
