Thursday May 17

Archive for February, 2008

Feb
29/08
Yes, and No
Last Updated on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 03:44
Written by JJ
Friday, February 29th, 2008

I’ve received a lot of nice emails over the past week or so and I hope to respond to everyone. So, in short- I wanted to say Yes, I’m still alive and No, I didn’t fall off the face of the Earth.

I’m usually on the road, but the past several weeks have been especially gruesome, intermingled with various professional and personal travel and time commitments, many lasting until the weeee hours of the morning. I’m perched again for about 72 hours and have some more things to share over the next few days.

Thanks for sticking with me!

# # #

Tags: , ,   |  Posted under Random-izations  |  Comments  No Comments
Feb
17/08
Software vs ASICs, Ethics and Capacitors
Last Updated on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 03:44
Written by JJ
Sunday, February 17th, 2008

Okay, stay with me here- it’s actually (sorta’) security-related.

I don’t always understand how my brain makes its jump to and from various topics, but I made myself chuckle when I thought of this and so, I have to share it. If you don’t find it entertaining, then feel free to go listen to NPR  instead.

Today, someone asked me why I don’t (or haven’t) put much effort in learning the full functions and features of the various vendors’ NAC software we integrate- either endpoint integrity agents, and/or 802.1X supplicants. It’s stuff like this that gets me thinking (yep- watchout!). 

And here’s what I discovered in my thoughts…

Software is like a whore. If you pay enough money, you can have it do anything you want. (Which is another reason I have personal feelings about security via software). 

I don’t worry about learning the software (agents) as it relates to NAC, because a programmer somewhere can tweak the software (for the right money). If you want your logo to appear- we can make it happen. You want to push the agent down in a package- we can do that too. And so, I’m more interested in the standards, technology and hardware capabilities… you know… the parts with ASICs, ethics and capacitors.  ;)

# # #

Tags: , ,   |  Posted under Network Niblets  |  Comments  2 Comments
Feb
15/08
What You Should Know: 568 A vs B
Last Updated on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 03:43
Written by JJ
Friday, February 15th, 2008

Why you need to know what your cabling standards are.

There are a few (okay, several) points of networking I’m working on understanding better. One of those is being able to succinctly explain to customers the difference between 568A and 568B and help determine which they’re using. I’m not at the point I can walk into a closet, glance at the patching, and tell you how it’s punched. I certainly don’t consider myself an expert on this (talk to your cabling provider) but here’s some good information to help you understand when it’s important, and what questions you should be asking.

So, to get started- what we have to understand is there are are two ‘levels’ of the 568 cabling standard. The first ‘mothership’ 568 standard is the all-encompassing EIA/TIA 568-B Telecom Standard (2001). (FYI- TIA, Telecommunications Industry Association is an assoc of the EIA, Electronics Industry Alliance).

Here’s where the A and B come in. Within the EIA/TIA 568-B Standard are a few pages dedicated to the pinouts, or Termination Standards – T568A and T568B which describe the pin/pair assignments for the cabling (Cat 3, 5, 6).

What’s the difference? Physically, pairs 2 & 3 (Green/Orange) are swapped. Functionally, because of the pair-swapping, the T568B is not backwards compatible with many legacy systems and telephony cabling. (FYI, 568B is not even recognized as a standard by several national telecomm organizations).

Why does it matter? In addition to not being backwards compatible, connections terminated with differing standards on each end will not function properly (or at all). This is extremely important if you’re going to be moving from 100-T to 1000-T, since Gig uses all 4 pairs.

To sum it up: EIA/TIA 568-B is the overall telecom standard, and T568A is the recommended termination, or pin out.

If you’re already setup with T568B throughout, then its recommended you stick with that. All new implementations should go with T568A, and we recommend ANYONE upgrading from 100T to 1000T double-check the cabling standards in patch panels when planning an upgrade (it’s part of our Layer 1 checklist). You may be running 10/100 over mixed-ends and it’s working, but when you slap that new Gig switch in the rack you could get a nasty surprise if you’re not paying attention.

# # #

Tags: , , , , , , ,   |  Posted under Network Niblets, Tips & Tricks  |  Comments  No Comments
Feb
11/08
Yes- I’m a Dancer
Last Updated on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 03:41
Written by JJ
Monday, February 11th, 2008

And no, not that kind. For some strange reason, in the past 6 weeks or so, there seems to be a great interest in my long-time hobby. An uncanny number of customers, partners and colleagues recently have either stumbled upon online competition results or chatted about it in passing. Everyone asks me about it…  

So- Yes- I’m a Dancer. In recent years, I’ve been most active in West Coast Swing and Ballroom, but my dance habit started long ago and far away, when I was a wee lass taking the obligatory ballet class.There were a few detours- it wasn’t long before I traded in the ballet slippers for a gymnastics leotard… and after I mastered the balance beam, I traded up (well, or just traded) for pom-pons. Yep, I was a cheerleader from middle school up, but it wasn’t all prissy-pants. My high school years I also busted butt on the Track Team, running sprints and (believe it or not) hurdles and jumps.

Finally I came back around and took a Called Ballroom Dance Class at my high school. It was more reminiscent of square dancing- steps were called aloud and we did them in unison. In my excitement I dragged our entire hall to the class, so of course we were short on ‘gents. To ease the mismatch, I learned the guys part and suddenly the world of dance was my playground.

I knew I wanted to learn more ballroom, but I actually began my competitive dance life with Shag (Carolina Shag, in case you’re reading from Europe ;) ). During those years, I had the pleasure of working with several Shag hall-of-famers and really came to love the people and culture of the dance- I’d later learn there’s no other like it.

Ballroom was still in the back of my head, and when my previous partner and I split up, I exited the Shag scene for a long time and found myself in a ballroom studio. It’s hard to have relationships in, around and with the dance world, so often my dancing caused issues and it was during one of those times that I took another break. Eventually I jumped back on the horse and did a little competitive American Ballroom. Everyone looks so snooty on tv, but most of the ballroom crowd is fun, crazy and quirky and I had a blast in the studio lessons, parties and at comps. We could go anywhere, any time and dance to any music.

One of my good friends at the time was also dabbling in various dances, and he dragged me on the floor to try some West Coast Swing one night. I sucked. It was horrible. All my Shag training had me instinctively doing everything I shouldn’t be doing in Swing, and the two dances were so close I couldn’t get out of the rut. After a No-Shag time, and some great coaching, I finally got it and I went in head first! I found myself competing at events, dance captain of a local team and dancing on another semi-pro competitive team. I was Swingin’ 8 nights a week!

During this time I experimented with other dances, including some Belly Dancing, Lindy and a touch of Balboa. (Don’t tell anyone, but I even competed in some Country/Western divisions… boots an’ all.) They’re all great and I encourage everyone to try it- especially if it’s been a burning secret desire. There’s no magic to it- if you practice a lot you’ll be good- if you don’t practice a lot, learn it socially and you’ll have a blast at clubs and parties.  

I’ve met a lot of people through dancing, many of whom I consider my closest friends. My work schedule doesn’t always allow for frolicking on the dance floor (you don’t get your CISSP and Master ASE in 6 months if you’re dancing 24/7).

So these days, I have to squeeze it in when I can, but it’s one of the few things I’d never trade. I’ve come full circle and make it my adult ballet classes when possible (FYI, the leotards were much cuter in size 2 pink). There’s something wonderful about the freedom and creativity of dance… and being able to enjoy the experience with so many friends.

# # #

Tags: , , ,   |  Posted under Random-izations  |  Comments  No Comments
Feb
05/08
Why Chassis is Chic
Last Updated on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 03:39
Written by JJ
Tuesday, February 5th, 2008

After a recent post, I received an email from a respected friend of mine about my reference to the advantages of a chassis (or modular) switch platform. He didn’t feel any special love towards chassis based switches, and he’s a pretty smart guy and been around the IT block a few times. It got me thinking, so I though I’d share my Top 10 reasons why Chassis is Chic.

Everyone calls them different things, so in case you’re not familiar with the terminology I’m throwing around- I refer to fixed form factor switches (usually 1U, 24-48 ports) as stackables and the blade-based or larger modular switches with 4-20ish slots as chassis.

10. Price & TCO. Let’s start at the bottom and work our way up. I can’t in good faith tell you that you can always fit more edge ports in a 4U or 7U chassis switch than you could with 4 or 7 48-port stackables. What I can tell you is the per port cost and TCO is usually much less in a chassis. The per-port up front cost is about 18-22% more on a stackable than on the chassis, plus you lose some performance and may have other space and resource consumption. You can run (for example) 288 ports in a chassis while taking up only 2 outlets in your closet, vs 7 outlets for 7 stackables with a max of about 330 ports (more space and outlets required if you’re using external or redundant power supplies on the stackables for PoE).

9. Fiber Aggregation. Inter-building and intra-campus connections are usually fiber runs, so there’s a growing need to support additions of fibers aggregating in the core. There are a few specialty ‘aggregation’ stackable switches from various vendors, but they’re still fixed form, and often have a max of ~30 ports of those connections (1000-SX, 1000-LX/LH). In a standard 6- or 12-slot chassis, you can support up to 288 fiber uplinks in one switch. If you get one of Cisco’s Big Honkers, you can have over 600 SFP ports in one switch. You’d need about 20 of their stackables to match that.

8. The 10 Gig Craze. Over the past 18 months or so, we’re seeing a huge boom in 10GbE demand. Customers are using 10GbE copper (CX4) for high-speed server links and 10GbE fiber (usually over single mode) for connecting to other buildings, and for interlinks between primary and backup sites. The switch manufacturers are offering stackables with options for a 10GbE uplink or two, usually to connect the stackable back upstream. But they’re not really designed to, nor capable of, offering multiple 10GbE interlinks, either up or down stream. The 10 Gig story ties into our next item, fabric speed.

7. Fabric Speed. Here’s something most people don’t stop to think about. Because the chassis based systems can support a higher port density per switch, the fabric speed is much higher, giving a chassis much more performance potential. In fact, it can vary 700% from a stackable to a chassis in the same product family. Whether you are, or aren’t using all the modules/ports on a chassis, you’re probably getting much better throughput since manufacturers shoot for ‘non-blocking architecture’ in chassis- meaning they support wire speed throughout, so as not to over-subscribe the switch. Of course, if you fill that sucker up with 10GbE links… well that’s another story.

6. Power Consumption. There’s a certain amount of overhead for running a system- if you can share that overhead and distribute it over more ports, then you’re getting more bang for your power buck. If you just need a few ports in a remote closet, then you’re surely doing yourself a favor with a small stackable. However, if you’re talking about stacking (physically and virtually) and interconnecting a bunch of lil’uns to make a big’un, then just start with the big’un.

5. Management & Maintenance. I know what you’re going to say… and yes… I know you can stack almost any brand of switches to create a virtual switch stack, manageable by a single IP. But, there’s still an increase in management (and maintenance) overhead. Someone has to connect all those things and keep any updates and changes well documented. Personally, for whatever reason, I just don’t get that warm and fuzzy feeling from virtual stacks. When a stackable goes down, you have to disconnect it, de-rack it all, replace and reverse. With chassis, we generally provision a spare module for critical connections (uplinks, servers) already prepared with the proper VLANs and port attributes. So, if a module goes, the connections can be relocated to the provisioned spare in a matter of minutes, giving you minimal down time.

4. Expansion Flexibility. It happens to everyone. You just needed 34 10/100 ports there last year…. then six months later you needed at least 20 PoE ports, for VoIP phones and a couple of APs. Another nine months rolled by before you added another building, bringing your fiber port requirements to 5. Yesterday you acquired a company and the additional drops for the adopted employees brings your edge port count to 120… again, with more PoE needed for the additional phones. See where I’m going with this? You could have started with a 48-port 10/100 stackable, added on a 24-port PoE switch, thrown on a link aggregation switch and then stacked up a few more to give you 120 edge ports… orrrrrrrr… you could have started with a chassis and just added modules as needed.

3. Integrated Redundancy. I touched on a piece of this in number 5- Management, but there’s more to it. Chassis are designed to give you more flexibility and are therefore, a more suitable platform for incorporating a certain amount of integrated redundancy. Talk to your current switch rep and see if they have a chassis with options for dual fabric modules, redundant management or system modules- I bet they do. Now, ask them if you can get that in any of the stackables. Aside from a hot-swapable power supply and maybe a field-replaceable fan tray, I don’t think you’re going to find much in the way of native redundancy in your stackable.

2. Advanced R&D. A stackable is a fixed-form switch. You may have options for a couple of uplinks, and maybe even 10GbE, but that’s about it. It’s a WYHIWYG – what you Have is what you get- not much more thought and development is going into that switch. For a chassis on the other hand, manufacturers are usually pouring the majority of their switch R&D resources into thinking up new and amazing modules to make your mouth water and your wallet burst open with joy. Just wait- I bet these next couple of years will bring a rainbow of crazy and innovative switch modules… I can’t wait.

      and the Number 1 reason Chassis is Chic

1. They’re Hot! C’mon – just look at a little stackable next to a nice, 7U chassis with blinky lights brimming and multiple modules churning away at all the passing packets. Really- can you beat that? I sure don’t think so.

# # #

Tags: , , , ,   |  Posted under Network Niblets  |  Comments  No Comments

More Content

Find more of my content at
- Low Tech Hacking book
- Dark Reading
- Network Computing
- IANS
- SearchSecurity
- TechTarget

Get Social

RSSFacebookLinkedinYoutube