Re: [foxboro] FW: More future direction questions.
- From: Kevin FitzGerrell <fitzgerrell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 09:32:34 +1300 (NZDT)
Alex,
An ATS that pluggeds into the nodebus racks is a good solution where a site has
existing CLANs and uses the ATS as a CLAN replacement.
For sites that already have NCNIs and V7.X switches, and want to use a V8 host
and ATSs to merge seperate networks together, having an ATS that plugs into the
V7 switches would be far better.
AW
V8.x
|
Switch
| | |
-----------/ | \-----------
| | |
ATS ATS ATS
| | |
Switch Switch Switch
| | |
System 1 at System 2 at System 3 at
V6.5.2/7.1.1 V6.5.2/7.1.1 V6.5.2/7.1.1
So, three choices at my site where I plan to do the merger/upgrade I've drawn
above:
Option 1 - use currently non-existant "direct to switches" ATS modules as above
-- adding a V8 node:
3 ATS
V8 Switches
V8 AW
Advantages -- very simple, no extra cabinets needed, relatively inexpensive,
provides easy upgrade path to bring individual segments onto the V8 network.
Disadvantage -- uses non-existant "direct to switches" ATS modules.
Option 2 - use gateway 1x8 racks between networks:
3 ATS
V8 Switches
V8 AW
3 1x8 racks
1 big cabinet to house racks
6 NCNI
Problems -- where to put the big cabinet, why have 10mbps link between
100mbps/1gbps networks (especially since the ATS can saturate a 10mbps 1/2
duplex nodebus), don't want to buy more NCNIs and 1x8 racks when we'll be moving
away from them anyway.
Option 3 - Put the ATS modules where we currently have NCNI modules (I
understand there will be advantage upgrades available):
40 ATS
V8 Switches (because I'll still need a set of root switches for the mesh)
V8 AW
Advantages -- this is where we want to be in a few years
Problems -- 40 ATS modules is a lot to buy at once, and doing this in one fell
swoop is a big job, it would be better to start with option 1 (or 2) and
gradually bring segments onto the V8 network.
Regards,
Kevin FitzGerrell
Carter Holt Harvey, Ltd.
+64 27 460 9994
Quoting "Johnson, Alex P (IPS)" <alex.johnson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> Re: The ideal solution for many of us that already have a 7.X/6.X mixed
> system is an ATS equivalent that can plug directly into the Foxboro
> V7.X
> fiber Ethernet switches that we have.
>
> There are no plans to build an ATS that plugs directly into the V7.x
> Ethernet switches.
>
> Is plugging it into a Nodebus a significant issue?
> Can you describe me the problems this causes you?
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Alex Johnson
> Invensys Systems, Inc.
> 10707 Haddington
> Houston, TX 77063
> +1 713 722 2859 (voice)
> +1 713 932 0222 (fax)
> +1 713 722 2700 (switchboard)
> alex.johnson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> On
> Behalf Of Neil Martin
> Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 1:41 PM
> To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [foxboro] FW: More future direction questions.
>
>
>
>
>
> Alex,
>
> The ideal solution for many of us that already have a 7.X/6.X mixed
> system,
> is an ATS equivalent that can plug directly into the Foxboro V7.X fiber
> ethernet switches that we have. Is there any of hope of Foxboro
> developing
> this any time soon?
>
> Neil Martin, P.E.
> Huntsman Polymers Corporation
> 2505 South Grandview
> Odessa, TX. 79766
> ph) 432-640-8436
> pager)432-742-4289
> email page)4327424289@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
>
> "Johnson, Alex P
>
> (IPS)" To:
> foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> <alex.johnson@xxxxxx cc:
>
> vensys.com> Subject: Re: [foxboro]
> FW: More future direction questions.
> Sent by:
>
> foxboro-bounce@freel
>
> ists.org
>
>
>
>
>
> 10/12/2005 01:28 PM
>
> Please respond to
>
> foxboro
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Re: I am interested to know if your example below is correct
>
> Yes. It is a legal configuration. The ATSs and NCNIs would be in one
> 1x8.
> The ATS and NCNI communicate over the 1x8's Nodebus cables.
>
> The NCNIs make the physical connection to the V7.x switches.
>
> The ATSs link the Nodebus equipment to the Mesh network. An ATS is
> required
> because the Mesh network does not have a 'A' and 'B' network and,
> therefore,
> requires different communications handling.
>
> There is a common misconception that an NCNI and an ATS are basically
> the
> same thing - this is incorrect. They are quite different.
>
>
> Does this help?
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Alex Johnson
> Invensys Systems, Inc.
> 10707 Haddington
> Houston, TX 77063
> +1 713 722 2859 (voice)
> +1 713 932 0222 (fax)
> +1 713 722 2700 (switchboard)
> alex.johnson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> On
> Behalf Of tom.vandewater@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 12:13 PM
> To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [foxboro] FW: More future direction questions.
>
> Alex,
> I am interested to know if your example below is correct or if
> you just forgot to remove the ATS on the NCNI segment that is above the
> segment where the other ATS is connected to the MESH. If the ATS in
> question is needed could you explain what function it serves? Thanks
> for any clarification you can offer.
>
> "Depending on your traffic levels this next configuration is actually
> better,
> but requires more 1x8s"
>
> V7.x AW
> |
> RCNI
> V6.x A | =20
> __|____ NCNI ___ |S|____NCNI____________ATS
> | | |W| | | =20
> CP CP |I| CP CP =20
> |T| _____
> |C|____NCNI____________ATS____|Mesh |-- AW/WP
> |H| |Ntwk |-- CP
> | |-- CP
> -----
> Cheers,
> Tom VandeWater
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Johnson, Alex P (IPS)
> Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 11:40 AM
> To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [foxboro] FW: More future direction questions.
>
> The correct way to link V7.x and V6.x equipment - if there are fewer
> than 64
> letterbugs in the combination - is something like this:
>
> V7.x AW
> |
> RCNI
> V6.x A |
> __|____ NCNI ___ SW____NCNI____________
> | | | |
> CP CP CP CP
>
>
> I didn't try to show the redundancy, but there are actually 2 pairs of
> NCNIs, 2 switches, and 1 RCNI that connects to both switches.
>
>
> Building on this, to add V8 equipment one would:
>
>
> V7.x AW
> |
> RCNI
> V6.x A | ______
> __|____ NCNI ___ SW____NCNI____________ATS_____| Mesh |-- AW/WP
> | | | | | Ntwk |-- CP
> CP CP CP CP | |-- CP
> ------
> Again, I didn't try to show redundancy, but you would have 2 ATS
> modules
> and
> multiple switches. The CP and AW/WPs connect with separate Ethernet
> NICs.
>
>
> Depending on your traffic levels this next configuration is actually
> better,
> but requires more 1x8s
>
> V7.x AW
> |
> RCNI
> V6.x A | =20
> __|____ NCNI ___ |S|____NCNI____________ATS
> | | |W| | | =20
> CP CP |I| CP CP =20
> |T| _____
> |C|____NCNI____________ATS____|Mesh |-- AW/WP
> |H| |Ntwk |-- CP
> | |-- CP
> -----
>
>
> If you have a bigger system with CBLANs installed, the configuration
> gets
> more complicated, but that's for another day.
>
> =20
> =20
>
>
>
> Regards,
> =20
> Alex Johnson
> Invensys Systems, Inc.
> 10707 Haddington
> Houston, TX 77063
> +1 713 722 2859 (voice)
> +1 713 932 0222 (fax)
> +1 713 722 2700 (switchboard)
> alex.johnson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> =20
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> On
> Behalf Of stan
> Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 9:03 AM
> To: Foxboro List
> Subject: [foxboro] FW: More future direction questions.
>
> I'm reposting this, as it went out just before huricane Rtia, and I
> suspect
> that a lot of people were a little busy to answer it :-)
>
>
> I've got 2 more questions related to future directions.
>
> 1. Given an existing "classic" nodebus node, and a V7 UNIX node with 2
> boot
> hosts, is the ATS still the appropriate solution to share data (and
> potentially control) between these 2 & 1/2 :-) nodes?
>
> Given a system with 2 boot hosts, each of which has it's own "sub
> node",
> that is each cabinet (2 total) has redundant fiber nodebus switches,
> and
> CP's but that is all committed as one "node". Should we connect the 2
> sets
> of
> switches with the gigabit uplinks, or should we just make 100M fiber
> connections between the 2 sets of switches?
>
> ASCII ART system architecture follows:
>
>
> +--------------+ +-----------------+
> +--| A Switch +......................| A Switch |--+
> | +--------------- +-----------------+ |
> | |
> | +--------------+ +-----------------+ |
> | | B Switch |......................| B Switch | |
> | +--------------+ +-----------------+ |
> | | | |
> | +---------------+ -----------------+ |
> +--| 1x8 with CP's | | 1x8 with CP's |--+
> +---------------+ -----------------+
>
>
> I've omitted the CP's connections to FBM's for clarity, and of course
> the
> Ix8's have NCNI's, and there are WP's and AW's connected to the
> switches.
> The
> dotted lines are the connections I'm asking about.
>
>
> Thanks for any input on this.
>
>
> --=20
> U.S. Encouraged by Vietnam Vote - Officials Cite 83% Turnout Despite
> Vietcong Terror=20
> - New York Times 9/3/1967
> =20
> =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: //www.freelists.org/list/foxboro
> to subscribe: =
> mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=3Djoin
> to unsubscribe: =
> mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=3Dleave
> =20
>
> =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: //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: //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
>
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> _
> 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
>
>
_______________________________________________________________________
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:
