Re: [foxboro] MESH Upgrade question

Under the original upgrade design, the host AW would sit on the MESH
while the gateways are on the other side.  According to Foxboro, the
gateways cannot communicate with their host when they are rebooted.  As
to how they are being rebooted, I don't have an answer. =20

We rejected the idea of keeping an AW as a host on the current network.
For our application, it would imply having both the MESH and the
carrierband network.  It defeated the purpose of having an upgrade if
that results in having to manage two networks.  =20

Are you having any difficulties obtaining the GW30B in general?    =20

-----Original Message-----
From: foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Kevin Fitzgerrell
Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2007 6:03 pm
To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [foxboro] MESH Upgrade question

When you say rebooted across the mesh - do you mean hosted across the
mesh?  Or send a reboot command across the mesh?

I'm doing about the same sort of upgrade you're talking about.  We
have some GW30 and some GW30B in a 12 node system, as well as lots of
CP30, CP40 and CP40B.  What we may do is swap GW30 and GW30B modules
(and CP40 with 40B) between nodes so that the nodes we do first are
all hostable across the mesh.

We have one (or more) AWs on each node and we'll preserve those to
start - for us, the most economical seems to be to just leave the old
AWs alone for some years to come.  We've moved to all E box AWs and
bought a bunch of spare U60 hardware and will just self support them
for the next 6-8 years or so.

Regards,

Kevin FitzGerrell
PT Freeport, Indonesia



On 12/21/07, Chaiket, Thom <tchaiket@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> Happy holidays from another active 'listener' of the list.  Was hoping
> to get some input on our situation.
>
> We are upgrading to the MESH (from Carrierband-LAN based network) in
> phases.  The first is to install the MESH switches and upgrade our
> current AW's and WP's to XP-based stations.  The CPs and gateways will
> be kept as they are, and communication will be done via ATS's. =3D20
>
> The problem is that we have COM30A integrators (PO960HA, "Rev A") in
our
> network and they cannot be rebooted across the ATS.  The most
economical
> option was to upgrade to COM30B integrators (PO961BD, "Rev B").  In
> addition to cost, we thought that, based on the latest lifecycle list
on
> the Foxboro website, it would give us until ~2015 before we should
> consider another upgrade (that's when the CP60's would also be phased
> out).    =3D20
>
> My questions are:
>
> 1.  Has anyone encounter a similar position and decided to upgrade to
> FBM231 right away?  In our case, I can't find a sufficiently strong
> justification to do so now.  By phasing out the upgrade in this
manner,
> we lower the risk of losing out if/when Foxboro is not going to come
out
> with another knock-out product in the next few years.
>
> 2.  Has anyone encounter problems/delays obtaining Rev B gateways?
> Foxboro is saying that it is difficult to get Rev B gateways and,
> furthermore, they are pushing to phase them out much sooner than 2015.
> My thought was that CP60s and Rev B gateways are still the workhorse
of
> existing I/A systems. =3D20
>
> Any thoughts would be extremely helpful.
>
> t
>
>
>
_______________________________________________________________________
> This mailing list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by Invensys
Process
> Systems (formerly The Foxboro Company). Use the info you obtain here
at
> your own risks. Read
http://www.thecassandraproject.org/disclaimer.html
>
> foxboro mailing list:
http://www.freelists.org/list/foxboro
> to subscribe:
mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=3Djoin
> to unsubscribe:
mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=3Dleave
>
>
=20
=20
_______________________________________________________________________
This mailing list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by Invensys Process
Systems (formerly The Foxboro Company). Use the info you obtain here at
your own risks. Read http://www.thecassandraproject.org/disclaimer.html
=20
foxboro mailing list:             http://www.freelists.org/list/foxboro
to subscribe:         =
mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=3Djoin
to unsubscribe:      =
mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=3Dleave
=20
 
 
_______________________________________________________________________
This mailing list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by Invensys Process
Systems (formerly The Foxboro Company). Use the info you obtain here at
your own risks. Read http://www.thecassandraproject.org/disclaimer.html
 
foxboro mailing list:             http://www.freelists.org/list/foxboro
to subscribe:         mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=join
to unsubscribe:      mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=leave

Other related posts: