nanog mailing list archives
Re: sfps from fs dot com
From: Nikolas Geyer <nik () neko id au>
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2019 22:20:50 +0000
Another vote for Approved here, awesome group of people and very thorough in their testing and fault analysis. We buy from them for Juniper, Ciena, Mellanox, Intel and a bunch of other random stuff. I’ve had mixed results with FS. Some stuff works fine, others we have high failure rates on longer term after 18 months give or take a little bit. The failed units typically come from interfaces that run at very high utilization levels 24x7 but have never done any more correlation than that. Sent from my iPhone On Sep 20, 2019, at 11:44 AM, Carl Peterson <carl-lists () portnetworks com<mailto:carl-lists () portnetworks com>> wrote: We have had some failures with 10G BiDi optics coded for Juniper. We buy a ton of other stuff from FS but for optics we have moved over to Approved Optics for everything but active ethernet residential subscribers. On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 7:33 AM Nicholas Warren <nwarren () barryelectric com<mailto:nwarren () barryelectric com>> wrote: Anyone have experience with fs.com<http://fs.com>'s lasers? Are they reliable?
Current thread:
- Re: sfps from fs dot com, (continued)
- Re: sfps from fs dot com Jason Lixfeld (Sep 20)
- Re: sfps from fs dot com Bryan Holloway (Sep 20)
- Re: sfps from fs dot com Jason Lixfeld (Sep 20)
- Re: sfps from fs dot com Neil Hanlon (Sep 20)
- Re: sfps from fs dot com Alain Hebert (Sep 23)
- Re: sfps from fs dot com Bryan Holloway (Sep 20)
- Re: sfps from fs dot com Jason Lixfeld (Sep 20)
- RE: sfps from fs dot com Kevin McCormick (Sep 20)
- RE: sfps from fs dot com Chris Gross (Sep 20)
- Re: sfps from fs dot com Dennis Lundström (Sep 20)
- Re: sfps from fs dot com Matthew Crocker (Sep 20)
- Re: sfps from fs dot com Carl Peterson (Sep 20)
- Re: sfps from fs dot com Nikolas Geyer (Sep 20)
- RE: sfps from fs dot com Michel Py (Sep 20)