Re: [foxboro] MESH without Enterasys Hardware
- From: "Brown, Stanley" <stan.brown@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 11:20:46 +0000
For what it is worth, there is an emerging specification that is gaining a lot
of traction in the electrical protection and control world. It is called PRP
(Parallel Redundancy Protocol). Basically you have 2 networks that do not cross
connect. These networks can be any configuration you like (with star being the
obvious one). The devices send packets on both networks. The receiving devices
discard the 2nd packet that arrives. This results in a zero time failover.
Please note that it does not require any more hardware than the Foxboro
implantation of rapid spanning tree. It does require that all devices that are
on both networks support ths protocol though. And that is only begging to
emerge as available.
-----Original Message-----
From: Stan Brown [mailto:stanb@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of corey
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 1:39 PM
To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [foxboro] MESH without Enterasys Hardware
Russ, if the bad guys can get to your Mesh switches, it's probably game over
anyway, regardless of vendor :)
I've been looking at Yokogawa a bit lately for a project, and their approach of
not caring much about the underlying network as long as it can get packets from
point A to point B is a refreshing one. (They also don't cross-connect their
primary and secondary nets, which is also refreshing.)
Corey
"Boulay, Russ" <Russ.Boulay@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>Enterasys switches are the only supported vendor for the IA Mesh Network.
>A handful of sites have implemented CISCO and take on the issues and
>limitations on their own.
>
>Invensys close relationship with Enterasys has led to enhancements and a
>greater understanding of how to appropriately apply different topologies and
>specific port configuration for best performance and added protection. Through
>the switch configuration tool we then make these recommendations easy to apply
>and configure a switch to the correct settings.
>
>The switch configuration tool besides its simplicity allows the import of your
>system commit files to automatically fill in many of the default parameters.
>
>And also remember....bigger name vendors also bring bigger hacker targets.
>I get alerts weekly from Homeland Security on newly discovered CISCO
>vulnerabilities.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
>Behalf Of Kevin Fitzgerrell
>Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 12:55 AM
>To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: Re: [foxboro] MESH without Enterasys Hardware
>
>I haven't checked recently, but Invensys used to provide guidance for using
>the Mesh with Cisco switches. If I recall correctly, there were some topology
>limitations due to (I believe) lower fail-over speeds.
>I was favorably impressed with the robustness of the Cabletron and later
>Enterasys switches over the Cisco and Hirschmann switches used in other
>control systems at sites I've worked with. I have often sourced my Enterasys
>switches outside of Invensys, and nearly always buy the MGBICs through IT
>suppliers rather than from Invensys. My costs for the Enterasys switches
>sourced outside of Invensys were normally lower than my costs for Cisco
>switches of similar capabilities, although it's been several years since I
>compared. Early on, Enterasys licensing for firmware was complicated and
>expensive, especially through Invensys, however for the last 8-10 years or so
>that has been a non-issue, and I've had little to no problem ordering with the
>Invensys supported firmware versions. While it was irritating to me to have
>only one vendor and a limited selection of switches to chose from for I/A on
>the Mesh, at least I felt I was getting good value for money.
>
>I can't speak for Honeywell, but neither the somewhat recent ABB nor the
>current Emerson control systems I'm working with recently have been nearly as
>well integrated with the switched network as I/A on the Mesh is, and I've got
>far fewer options available for topology and architecture than I did with I/A.
> Until recently, ABB's 800xA only gave me the option of redundant rings, but
>it looks like they've really improved their network and computing options
>since I last spec'd one. The Emerson DeltaV system I'm working with now is
>basically redundant star, no tree, no rings and no VLANs. Emerson is
>introducing their own DeltaV branded version of smart switches (Hirschmann
>switches) and appears to be moving towards having only Emerson DeltaV Smart
>Switches for anything other than basic connectivity.
>
>On a somewhat related note, one site I worked with fairly recently picked
>their ABB control system largely because ABB was the only bidder for the DCS
>portion of the project who supported running the control network on a common
>switched network (Cisco) backbone along with the site's VOIP, cameras,
>corporate network and drive-by-wire systems. While I understand the desire to
>have to support only one network and one switch brand at a site, in this case
>the common backbone caused much operating downtime that would have been
>avoided with a separate control network.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Kevin FitzGerrell
>
>
>
>On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 2:19 PM, Richard Peck <lovetomix@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>> Has anyone out there implemented the MESH network (in any topology)
>> without using the Invensys Supplied Enterasys Switches?
>>
>> In comparison with other systems Invensys is the only vendor (that I'm
>> aware of) that is locking customers in on a specific switch. (for
>> example Honeywell use off the shelf Cisco - you can purchase them from
>> anywhere)
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Richard
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________________
>> _ 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: //www.freelists.org/list/foxboro
>> to subscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=join
>> to unsubscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=leave
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________________________________
>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: //www.freelists.org/list/foxboro
>to subscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=join
>to unsubscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=leave
>
>
>
>*** Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail, including any associated or attached
>files, is intended solely for the individual or entity to which it is
>addressed. This e-mail is confidential and may well also be legally
>privileged. If you have received it in error, you are on notice of its status.
>Please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this
>message from your system. Please do not copy it or use it for any purposes, or
>disclose its contents to any other person. This email comes from a division of
>the Invensys Group, owned by Invensys plc, which is a company registered in
>England and Wales with its registered office at 3rd Floor, 40 Grosvenor Place,
>London, SW1X 7AW (Registered number 166023). For a list of European legal
>entities within the Invensys Group, please select the Legal Entities link at
>invensys.com.
>
>
>You may contact Invensys plc on +44 (0)20 3155 1200 or e-mail
>reception@xxxxxxxxxxxx. This e-mail and any attachments thereto may be subject
>to the terms of any agreements between Invensys (and/or its subsidiaries and
>affiliates) and the recipient (and/or its subsidiaries and affiliates).
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________________________________
>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: //www.freelists.org/list/foxboro
>to subscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=join
>to unsubscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=leave
>
_______________________________________________________________________
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: //www.freelists.org/list/foxboro
to subscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=join
to unsubscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=leave
________________________________
The information contained in this message and any attached files may be
privileged and/or confidential and protected from disclosure. If you are not
the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of any of
the information contained in or attached to this transmission is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please so notify
the sender immediately without reading it. Also, please promptly destroy the
original transmission and its attachments. Any views or opinions presented in
this message or attachments are those of the author and do not necessarily
represent those of KapStone Paper and Packaging Corporation or its subsidiaries.
_______________________________________________________________________
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: //www.freelists.org/list/foxboro
to subscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=join
to unsubscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=leave
Other related posts:
