Re: OOB core router connectivity wish list

[Jared Mauch <jared () puck nether net>]

On Jan 10, 2013, at 9:51 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike () swm pp se> wrote:

> On Thu, 10 Jan 2013, Christopher Morrow wrote:
>
> > >        - rs232: please no.  it's 2013.  I don't want or need a protocol which
> > > was designed for access speeds appropriate to the 1980s.
> >
> > I don't think you can get ethernet and transport out-of-the-area in
> > some places at a reasonable cost, so having serial-console I think is
> > still a requirement.
>
> I don't understand this argument.
>
> Are you connecting your CON directly to something that transports it out-of-the-area? Modem?

Yes, we have done this in a site with one device.

> If you have a consolerouter there with T1 interface as link to outside world, what's wrong with having ethernet port 
> from that T1 router to the ethernet OOB port on the router needing OOB access, instead of having RS232 port on them. 
> It's cheaper and easier to cable ethernet compared to RS232. RS232 has much shorter cable length compared to ethernet 
> (9600 reaches 20 meters or so).

I certainly want to use something more modern, having run Xmodem to load images into devices or net-booted systems with 
very large images in the past…

I've seen all sorts of creative ways to do this (e.g.: DSL for OOB, 3G, private VPLS network via outside carrier).  It 
is a challenge in the modern network space.  Plus I have to figure that 9600 modems are going to be harder to find as 
time goes by.. at some point folks will stop making them. 

- Jared