Lightning Debates at NANOG 51
Folks, I've been tempted by the NANOG PC into trying to run some "Lightning Debates" at NANOG 51 in Miami. The idea, similar to lighting talks, is a 30 minute session, covering 3 debate topics, 10 minutes each. Each person would get 5 minutes to argue their side of the issue. Some ideas so far: UPS Systems: Battery vs. Flywheel Cooling: Raised floor vs. Underfloor Power: AC vs. DC Ethernet: 40GE vs. 100GE Optics: XFP vs. SFP+ Address Families: IPv4 vs. IPv6 I'm soliciting panelists, and ideas. Please let me know if you're interested in participating in what will hopefully be a unique and exciting session. Best, Tom -- Tom Daly http://dyn.com/
On Dec 7, 2010, at 11:20 AM, Tom Daly wrote:
Folks, I've been tempted by the NANOG PC into trying to run some "Lightning Debates" at NANOG 51 in Miami. The idea, similar to lighting talks, is a 30 minute session, covering 3 debate topics, 10 minutes each. Each person would get 5 minutes to argue their side of the issue.
Some ideas so far:
UPS Systems: Battery vs. Flywheel
Which side will be represented by the folks from 365 Main?
Cooling: Raised floor vs. Underfloor
What about overhead (which is the usual opposite to underfloor which is the same as raised floor in most cases)
Power: AC vs. DC
I think this is more context sensitive and that a one-size fits all argument on either side wouldn't make much sense.
Ethernet: 40GE vs. 100GE
ROFL
Optics: XFP vs. SFP+
This is a debate topic? Really?
Address Families: IPv4 vs. IPv6
Ooh... This one might be interesting. Owen
On Tue, 7 Dec 2010, Owen DeLong wrote:
Ethernet: 40GE vs. 100GE
ROFL
Even more interesting is the 100GE Optics debate. Standardized (expensive and very scarce) 100GBASE-LR4 vs non-standard but cheaper and easier to manufacture LR10 (based on 10x 10Gbit/s on a very narrow DWDM-grid).. Jac -- Jac Kloots Network Services SURFnet bv
Cooling: Raised floor vs. Underfloor
forgive me, but what is the difference between raised floor and underfloor?
Ethernet: 40GE vs. 100GE
people are debating which is better? really?
Optics: XFP vs. SFP+
? some interesting choices of things to debate.. are these serious debate sessions or more for fun? -- This message and any attachments may contain confidential and/or privileged information for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review or distribution by anyone other than the person for whom it was originally intended is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender and delete all copies. Opinions, conclusions or other information contained in this message may not be that of the organization.
Greg,
forgive me, but what is the difference between raised floor and underfloor?
Excuse me. Raised floor vs. overhead.
Ethernet: 40GE vs. 100GE
people are debating which is better? really?
I'm sure someone has an opinion...
Optics: XFP vs. SFP+
?
some interesting choices of things to debate.. are these serious debate sessions or more for fun?
They are meant to be informative. Maybe you have no idea on what XFP or SFP+ is because you've been running a Gigabit based network and haven't made the jump to 10GE yet - the debate might give you the top 3-5 points on why each might be the right option for you. And then, of course, there is a fun factor. Tom
They are meant to be informative. Maybe you have no idea on what XFP or SFP+ is because you've been running a Gigabit based network and haven't made the jump to 10GE yet - the debate might give you the top 3-5 points on why each might be the right option for you. And then, of course, there is a fun factor.
Tom
In most cases it isn't an option, you use what the hardware uses. I can't decide to use an SFP+ in a unit with XFP form factor. I select the hardware according to the features I need and then buy the optics it requires, I don't select the hardware based on the optics modules it uses. The only drawback I have seen so far is finding ER optics in SFP+ form factor but they might be available now (I couldn't find them a year or so ago). A good topic might be ipv6 migration strategies: dual stack or native v6 with nat64/dns64
In most cases it isn't an option, you use what the hardware uses. I can't decide to use an SFP+ in a unit with XFP form factor. I select the hardware according to the features I need and then buy the optics it requires, I don't select the hardware based on the optics modules it uses. The only drawback I have seen so far is finding ER optics in SFP+ form factor but they might be available now (I couldn't find them a year or so ago).
George, Good point. Perhaps the context should be more nebulous? Given a choice in an ideal word, not limited by the selection of hardware manufactures, which do you prefer? ras did a good talk on optics in the past, I'm sure there's some points to discuss.
A good topic might be ipv6 migration strategies: dual stack or native v6 with nat64/dns64
Alright, added. Are you volunteering to speak to one point or the other? Thanks, Tom
From: Tom Daly Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2010 12:41 PM To: George Bonser Cc: nanog@nanog.org; Greg Whynott Subject: Re: Lightning Debates at NANOG 51
A good topic might be ipv6 migration strategies: dual stack or native v6 with nat64/dns64
Alright, added. Are you volunteering to speak to one point or the other?
I might be happy to submit something written but won't be able to get there in person. Being a sole full-time parent causes some adjustment in priorities. I would certainly be interested in the opinions of others, too.
Excuse me. Raised floor vs. overhead.
ahh that makes much more sense, thanks Tom.
I'm sure someone has an opinion…
i suspect you are correct, not sure who would elect for the slower standard, considering they hit the streets fairly close to each other and I can't see there being a huge difference in cost, but i could be wrong. (the isp i'm connected to is running100G now)
Optics: XFP vs. SFP+ Maybe you have no idea on what XFP or SFP+ is because you've been running a Gigabit based network and haven't made the jump to 10GE yet -
i've more 10G ports than you can shake a stick at actually… my '?' was again, people debate this? as the bit rates are verbatum, the major difference which one would choose the other over from my understanding was distance to endpoint.. but again i could be wrong… wishing now i didn't send anything. 8) -g -- This message and any attachments may contain confidential and/or privileged information for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review or distribution by anyone other than the person for whom it was originally intended is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender and delete all copies. Opinions, conclusions or other information contained in this message may not be that of the organization.
Greg,
i suspect you are correct, not sure who would elect for the slower standard, considering they hit the streets fairly close to each other and I can't see there being a huge difference in cost, but i could be wrong. (the isp i'm connected to is running100G now)
Regarding 40G/100G, I'm sure some in the NANOG community have some feeling towards 40G as it was intended to be a server platform standard. With architectures such as 1aq, TRILL, VL2, etc, there may be some grounds here. What's the good of 100G if you can't push the PPS, for example. Just a thought...
i've more 10G ports than you can shake a stick at actually… my '?' was again, people debate this? as the bit rates are verbatum, the major difference which one would choose the other over from my understanding was distance to endpoint.. but again i could be wrong… wishing now i didn't send anything. 8)
Nah, send away. What debate were you volunteering to take a position on again? :) Tom
On Tue, 7 Dec 2010 15:24:16 -0500 (EST) Tom Daly <tom@dyn.com> wrote:
They are meant to be informative. Maybe you have no idea on what XFP or SFP+ is because you've been running a Gigabit based network and haven't made the jump to 10GE yet - the debate might give you the top 3-5 points on why each might be the right option for you. And then, of course, there is a fun factor.
Hi Tom, I think this could work. However, instead of in terms of X versus Y, I'd suggest coming up with some proposition, such as "You need to be deploying IPv6 right now" and let people sign up for the affirmative or negative. John
I have a suggestion... Nanog Mailing List: Critical Operational Content vs. Break time Amusement *ducks* -- Leo Bicknell - bicknell@ufp.org - CCIE 3440 PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
I agree, I just joined the list today and was about to unsubscribe because of all the realtively useless posts <ducks behind Leo> "Leo Bicknell" <bicknell@ufp.org> wrote:
I have a suggestion...
Nanog Mailing List: Critical Operational Content vs. Break time Amusement
*ducks*
-- Leo Bicknell - bicknell@ufp.org - CCIE 3440 PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
-- Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
This is nanog-futures stuff and/or community meeting stuff. Kris On Dec 7, 2010, at 2:12 PM, Christian Pena wrote:
I agree, I just joined the list today and was about to unsubscribe because of all the realtively useless posts <ducks behind Leo>
"Leo Bicknell" <bicknell@ufp.org> wrote:
I have a suggestion...
Nanog Mailing List: Critical Operational Content vs. Break time Amusement
*ducks*
-- Leo Bicknell - bicknell@ufp.org - CCIE 3440 PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
-- Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
participants (9)
-
Christian Pena -
George Bonser -
Greg Whynott -
Jac Kloots -
John Kristoff -
kris foster -
Leo Bicknell -
Owen DeLong -
Tom Daly