From bob at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Fri Oct 7 18:20:31 2011 From: bob at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Bob Adamson) Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 18:20:31 +0800 (WST) Subject: [tech] OpenSUSE on Pinball Message-ID: Hi All, Pinball needed a reinstall after the camp, and I decided I was sick of Ubununununtu. OpenSUSE had sufficiently impressed me when I used its livecd, so it got installed on pinball. Mmmmm...green. The only significant problems I encountered were that OpenSUSE doesn't start services such as nfs or autofs when you start using them. There was also a problem with compiz not working properly because compiz-manager wasn't being started - thanks to David Gow for helping resolve this problem. Anyway, all of this has been added to the OpenSUSE section on http://wiki.ucc.asn.au/SOE Most users haven't even noticed that it's a different install, so it can't be that bad. It certainly comes with a lot more out of the box than Ubuntu or Debian - I only had to install 5 things on top of what it came with. Andrew Adamson UCC President bob at ucc.asn.au |"The faster you move, the slower time passes, the longer you live." | | ---Peter's Laws | From tpg at ucc.asn.au Wed Oct 12 20:05:14 2011 From: tpg at ucc.asn.au (John Hodge) Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 20:05:14 +0800 Subject: [tech] Prospective new machine - Trim-Slice Message-ID: <4E95827A.2010901@ucc.asn.au> While discussing the topic of replacing red, it was suggested that we replace it with an ARM based machine. Searching the internet uncovered this: http://trimslice.com/web/ It's an ARM Cortex-A9 based desktop, with SATA, Gigabit Ethernet, 4x USB2.0, HDMI and 1GiB of RAM. The listed price for the box is $279USD + $66 P&H, so it would probably end up about ~$350AU for the box. Add to that a new screen (one of the ones bob just announced - which may end up on another box, with that machine's screen moving to this) and the total would be about $600. Why an ARM machine? #1. It's something different. Breaking the monotony of x86 machines. #2. ARM is up and coming for desktops, this gives us a chance to test it out. #3. The ARM architecture just a nice architecture :) #4. Linux is supported on it, very nicely. (In fact, it can come with Linux pre-installed) Any suggestions / comments, please reply to the list. From harrymc at decisions-and-designs.com.au Wed Oct 12 22:38:09 2011 From: harrymc at decisions-and-designs.com.au (Harry McNally) Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 22:38:09 +0800 Subject: [tech] Prospective new machine - Trim-Slice In-Reply-To: <4E95827A.2010901@ucc.asn.au> References: <4E95827A.2010901@ucc.asn.au> Message-ID: <4E95A651.2080508@decisions-and-designs.com.au> Hi John I think it'd be interesting to have/try. On 12/10/11 20:05, John Hodge wrote: > While discussing the topic of replacing red, it was suggested that we > replace it with an ARM based machine. <...> > Any suggestions / comments, please reply to the list. From bob at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Fri Oct 14 18:34:34 2011 From: bob at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Bob Adamson) Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 18:34:34 +0800 (WST) Subject: [tech] New linux machine Message-ID: The "Want" email I sent earlier in the year with the specs and prices for a new linux machine is pretty out of date now, so I came up with a new box. This machine can either replace humpback, be one of the first machines to use a new bench place after the cleanup, or replace a thinterm if the thinterm moves to the corridor. If it becomes a additional machine instead of a replacement, we will also need a screen, mouse and keyboard. This will be discussed at the committee meeting on Tuesday, and I would be interested to hear people's opinions on the matter. $$$ Item ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 89 Coolermaster elite 335 case with 420W psu 110 Asus F1A75-M-LE FM1 USB3 Hudson D3 RAID GLAN DVI MB 64 G.Skill Ripjaws X F3-12800CL9D-8GBXL 8G Kit(4Gx2) DDR3 1600 (from MSY) 249 120Gb Corsair Force 3 SSD 2.5" SATA3 550/510 MB/s HDD SF-2200 CSSD-F120GB3-BK 154 AMD A8-3850 Quad Core Fusion FM1 CPU 2.9Ghz 4Mb Llano 3850 AD3850WNGXBOX Boxed HS & Fan 79 Samsung SH-B123A Blu Ray Combo Drive DVDRW & BluRay Reader SATA Retail Black ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 745 total (previous price was $822, and this build has better specs) All from netplus unless noted otherwise. We already have all the peripherals, screens, etc, so this is just the box. Security needs also depend on what place this box takes - we'll need more cables and locks if it becomes an additional machine. Again, this will be discussed at the next committee meeting before purchase. Andrew Adamson UCC President bob at ucc.asn.au |"The faster you move, the slower time passes, the longer you live." | | ---Peter's Laws | From danielax at gmail.com Sat Oct 15 00:55:26 2011 From: danielax at gmail.com (Daniel Axtens) Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 00:55:26 +0800 Subject: [tech] [wheel] Internet Usage Message-ID: <32C3259C-0D6F-4741-ACE8-A8AE39D33DB9@gmail.com> Hi fellow cabal members, We're putting rather a lot through our internet connection. This is not technically a problem at the moment, but I think there is considerable value in being proactive on this issue. I have also overheard people talking about making large (several hour) downloads at UCC, and I think this is behaviour we want to discourage. There are two things I'd suggest: 1) Throttling non-freenets traffic on clubroom machines the wireless down from aarnet-fast to standard-residential-broadband-fast. 2) Shaping the connections of non-UCC machines (probably by MAC address?) that use more than a certain amount (say 1GB) of traffic in a certain amount of time (say a day). Reduce their speed to something usable but not quite "broadband" - say 128kbps. Not sure how much work this would be. I think these changes would have considerable value in 'encouraging' people to use our internet connection responsibly and appropriately. What are people's thoughts? If we're in favour, I am happy to try to implement this stuff but I won't be able to start until after exams. I'm happy for someone else to do it if anyone has a burning desire to do so. [DJA] ps. Is it possible/desirable to cache steam downloads? From zanchey at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Mon Oct 17 21:09:13 2011 From: zanchey at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (David Adam) Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 21:09:13 +0800 (WST) Subject: [tech] New UWA network interface options Message-ID: UWA is getting an exciting new core network, which promises to be highly-buzzword compliant. UCC is one of the test groups for the new core network, mostly because apparently we're one of the few groups on campus doing actual service over IPv6. To interface with the new network (which will be gigabit fibre to the Cameron Hall comms room), we need to upgrade our current uplink equipment in the Cameron Hall comms room, which is currently simply a 100mbit fibre convertor. There are two options immediately available: - Install sesame, a Cisco Catalyst 3508G XL donated by [AHC] and refurbished by me; this has 8 GBIC slots and is currently configured for dual 1000baseLX (single-mode fibre) and 1000baseTX (copper). - Install palm, a Cisco Catalyst 2948G-GE-TX with 48 10/100/1000baseTX ports and 4 SFP slots (the Uni will lend us SFPs on a long-term basis). The problem with the first option, which I discovered with a trill of gay laughter after having spent many hours trying to get it working, is that you can't connected any 100 megabit devices to a copper GBIC. However, I'm not convinced that our uplink copper cable will support gigabit traffic. Also I will ask the club for $50 to recoup part of the cost of new fans and GBICs. [*] The problem with the second option is that it takes what is currently our LAN switch out of commission and wastes 44 perfectly good copper ports. However, with the new giant Cisco 4507R installed in the rack, we might be migrating off coconut (same model as palm) sometime soon anyway, which would negate this. Alternatively, if we can talk [AHC] into selling or donating the Cisco 2948G living in the machine room (which has 48 10/100 ports but two GBIC slots), we could use that if our uplink doesn't support Gigabit speeds. Opinions and other alternatives welcome. UWA IS (nee ITS nee UCS) has stipulated against the use of media converters and is very keen to have everything that interfaces with the core network from the Cisco line. Replacing the uplink copper to the Cameron Hall comms room is apparently prohibitively expensive. David Adam UCC Wheel Member zanchey at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au [*]: it also doesn't support PAgP/LACP or load-balancing over aggregation groups using anything other than level 2 addresses. We only have two level 2 address doing any real work on that link, but that's largely irrelevant because our bottleneck is the piece of copper between the Cameron Hall comms room and the UCC machine room. From mattman at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Mon Oct 17 21:17:10 2011 From: mattman at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Matt Didcoe) Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 21:17:10 +0800 Subject: [tech] Fwd: New UWA network interface options In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Or I could reply all and everyone could be enlightened not just David :) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Matt Didcoe Date: Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 9:16 PM Subject: Re: [tech] New UWA network interface options To: David Adam Just to expand on those costs... 8C SMOF from Cameron Hall Guild Communications (Level 2) -> UCC Machine Room (using UWA provided cable and taking an overhead route as opposed to what our copper does) comes in around $1300 ex GST (that includes labour, ducting, FOBOT). 1x Category 6 cable from CH Comms to UCC MR is $470 ex GST, also taking an overhead route. [MRD] On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 9:09 PM, David Adam wrote: > UWA is getting an exciting new core network, which promises to be > highly-buzzword compliant. UCC is one of the test groups for the new core > network, mostly because apparently we're one of the few groups on campus > doing actual service over IPv6. > > To interface with the new network (which will be gigabit fibre to the > Cameron Hall comms room), we need to upgrade our current uplink equipment > in the Cameron Hall comms room, which is currently simply a 100mbit fibre > convertor. > > There are two options immediately available: > > - Install sesame, a Cisco Catalyst 3508G XL donated by [AHC] and > ?refurbished by me; this has 8 GBIC slots and is currently configured for > ?dual 1000baseLX (single-mode fibre) and 1000baseTX (copper). > > - Install palm, a Cisco Catalyst 2948G-GE-TX with 48 10/100/1000baseTX > ?ports and 4 SFP slots (the Uni will lend us SFPs on a long-term basis). > > The problem with the first option, which I discovered with a trill of gay > laughter after having spent many hours trying to get it working, is that > you can't connected any 100 megabit devices to a copper GBIC. However, I'm > not convinced that our uplink copper cable will support gigabit traffic. > Also I will ask the club for $50 to recoup part of the cost of new fans > and GBICs. [*] > > The problem with the second option is that it takes what is currently our > LAN switch out of commission and wastes 44 perfectly good copper ports. > However, with the new giant Cisco 4507R installed in the rack, we might be > migrating off coconut (same model as palm) sometime soon anyway, which > would negate this. > > Alternatively, if we can talk [AHC] into selling or donating the Cisco > 2948G living in the machine room (which has 48 10/100 ports but two GBIC > slots), we could use that if our uplink doesn't support Gigabit speeds. > > Opinions and other alternatives welcome. UWA IS (nee ITS nee UCS) has > stipulated against the use of media converters and is very keen to have > everything that interfaces with the core network from the Cisco line. > Replacing the uplink copper to the Cameron Hall comms room is apparently > prohibitively expensive. > > David Adam > UCC Wheel Member > zanchey at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au > > [*]: it also doesn't support PAgP/LACP or load-balancing over aggregation > groups using anything other than level 2 addresses. We only have two level > 2 address doing any real work on that link, but that's largely irrelevant > because our bottleneck is the piece of copper between the Cameron Hall > comms room and the UCC machine room. > > From adrian at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Mon Oct 17 21:27:04 2011 From: adrian at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Adrian Chadd) Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 21:27:04 +0800 Subject: [tech] New UWA network interface options In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20111017132704.GE17572@ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> On Mon, Oct 17, 2011, David Adam wrote: > The problem with the first option, which I discovered with a trill of gay > laughter after having spent many hours trying to get it working, is that > you can't connected any 100 megabit devices to a copper GBIC. However, I'm > not convinced that our uplink copper cable will support gigabit traffic. > Also I will ask the club for $50 to recoup part of the cost of new fans > and GBICs. [*] Ah, no multi-rate gbics for the Cisco 3508? Shame. > Alternatively, if we can talk [AHC] into selling or donating the Cisco > 2948G living in the machine room (which has 48 10/100 ports but two GBIC > slots), we could use that if our uplink doesn't support Gigabit speeds. I'd honestly prefer you guys run some cat5e? :) Or get some fibre run? Because any other solution is unfortunately filled with "what do we do if it breaks?" questions. :/ Adrian From bob at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Mon Oct 17 21:34:06 2011 From: bob at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Bob Adamson) Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 21:34:06 +0800 (WST) Subject: [tech] New UWA network interface options In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: It seems to me that if the copper link doesn't support gigabit, then this whole endeavour is pointless because we'll still have the 100mb bottleneck that we've been trying so hard to get around. I say test the link, if it doesn't do the speed, then we look at getting it replaced. Andrew Adamson UCC President bob at ucc.asn.au |"The faster you move, the slower time passes, the longer you live." | | ---Peter's Laws | On Mon, 17 Oct 2011, David Adam wrote: > UWA is getting an exciting new core network, which promises to be > highly-buzzword compliant. UCC is one of the test groups for the new core > network, mostly because apparently we're one of the few groups on campus > doing actual service over IPv6. > > To interface with the new network (which will be gigabit fibre to the > Cameron Hall comms room), we need to upgrade our current uplink equipment > in the Cameron Hall comms room, which is currently simply a 100mbit fibre > convertor. > > There are two options immediately available: > > - Install sesame, a Cisco Catalyst 3508G XL donated by [AHC] and > refurbished by me; this has 8 GBIC slots and is currently configured for > dual 1000baseLX (single-mode fibre) and 1000baseTX (copper). > > - Install palm, a Cisco Catalyst 2948G-GE-TX with 48 10/100/1000baseTX > ports and 4 SFP slots (the Uni will lend us SFPs on a long-term basis). > > The problem with the first option, which I discovered with a trill of gay > laughter after having spent many hours trying to get it working, is that > you can't connected any 100 megabit devices to a copper GBIC. However, I'm > not convinced that our uplink copper cable will support gigabit traffic. > Also I will ask the club for $50 to recoup part of the cost of new fans > and GBICs. [*] > > The problem with the second option is that it takes what is currently our > LAN switch out of commission and wastes 44 perfectly good copper ports. > However, with the new giant Cisco 4507R installed in the rack, we might be > migrating off coconut (same model as palm) sometime soon anyway, which > would negate this. > > Alternatively, if we can talk [AHC] into selling or donating the Cisco > 2948G living in the machine room (which has 48 10/100 ports but two GBIC > slots), we could use that if our uplink doesn't support Gigabit speeds. > > Opinions and other alternatives welcome. UWA IS (nee ITS nee UCS) has > stipulated against the use of media converters and is very keen to have > everything that interfaces with the core network from the Cisco line. > Replacing the uplink copper to the Cameron Hall comms room is apparently > prohibitively expensive. > > David Adam > UCC Wheel Member > zanchey at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au > > [*]: it also doesn't support PAgP/LACP or load-balancing over aggregation > groups using anything other than level 2 addresses. We only have two level > 2 address doing any real work on that link, but that's largely irrelevant > because our bottleneck is the piece of copper between the Cameron Hall > comms room and the UCC machine room. > From matt at ucc.asn.au Mon Oct 17 21:35:25 2011 From: matt at ucc.asn.au (Matt Johnston) Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 21:35:25 +0800 Subject: [tech] New UWA network interface options In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20111017133525.GL17889@ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> Can we get someone cheaper to install it? Matt On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 09:34:06PM +0800, Bob Adamson wrote: > It seems to me that if the copper link doesn't support gigabit, then this > whole endeavour is pointless because we'll still have the 100mb bottleneck > that we've been trying so hard to get around. I say test the link, if it > doesn't do the speed, then we look at getting it replaced. > > Andrew Adamson > UCC President > bob at ucc.asn.au > > |"The faster you move, the slower time passes, the longer you live." | > | ---Peter's Laws | > > On Mon, 17 Oct 2011, David Adam wrote: > > > UWA is getting an exciting new core network, which promises to be > > highly-buzzword compliant. UCC is one of the test groups for the new core > > network, mostly because apparently we're one of the few groups on campus > > doing actual service over IPv6. > > > > To interface with the new network (which will be gigabit fibre to the > > Cameron Hall comms room), we need to upgrade our current uplink equipment > > in the Cameron Hall comms room, which is currently simply a 100mbit fibre > > convertor. > > > > There are two options immediately available: > > > > - Install sesame, a Cisco Catalyst 3508G XL donated by [AHC] and > > refurbished by me; this has 8 GBIC slots and is currently configured for > > dual 1000baseLX (single-mode fibre) and 1000baseTX (copper). > > > > - Install palm, a Cisco Catalyst 2948G-GE-TX with 48 10/100/1000baseTX > > ports and 4 SFP slots (the Uni will lend us SFPs on a long-term basis). > > > > The problem with the first option, which I discovered with a trill of gay > > laughter after having spent many hours trying to get it working, is that > > you can't connected any 100 megabit devices to a copper GBIC. However, I'm > > not convinced that our uplink copper cable will support gigabit traffic. > > Also I will ask the club for $50 to recoup part of the cost of new fans > > and GBICs. [*] > > > > The problem with the second option is that it takes what is currently our > > LAN switch out of commission and wastes 44 perfectly good copper ports. > > However, with the new giant Cisco 4507R installed in the rack, we might be > > migrating off coconut (same model as palm) sometime soon anyway, which > > would negate this. > > > > Alternatively, if we can talk [AHC] into selling or donating the Cisco > > 2948G living in the machine room (which has 48 10/100 ports but two GBIC > > slots), we could use that if our uplink doesn't support Gigabit speeds. > > > > Opinions and other alternatives welcome. UWA IS (nee ITS nee UCS) has > > stipulated against the use of media converters and is very keen to have > > everything that interfaces with the core network from the Cisco line. > > Replacing the uplink copper to the Cameron Hall comms room is apparently > > prohibitively expensive. > > > > David Adam > > UCC Wheel Member > > zanchey at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au > > > > [*]: it also doesn't support PAgP/LACP or load-balancing over aggregation > > groups using anything other than level 2 addresses. We only have two level > > 2 address doing any real work on that link, but that's largely irrelevant > > because our bottleneck is the piece of copper between the Cameron Hall > > comms room and the UCC machine room. > > From astro at jaram.net.au Mon Oct 17 21:36:37 2011 From: astro at jaram.net.au (Jeremy Cole) Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 21:36:37 +0800 Subject: [tech] New UWA network interface options In-Reply-To: <20111017132704.GE17572@ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> References: <20111017132704.GE17572@ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> Message-ID: <38338D4E-DFE8-4053-A82C-9F922F820988@jaram.net.au> On 17/10/2011, at 9:27PM, Adrian Chadd wrote: > "what do we do if it breaks?" questions. > Sorry... Is this the UCC I remember it being? Surely we will just hack away at it till it works like we want it to... From matt at ucc.asn.au Mon Oct 17 21:37:41 2011 From: matt at ucc.asn.au (Matt Johnston) Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 21:37:41 +0800 Subject: [tech] New UWA network interface options In-Reply-To: <38338D4E-DFE8-4053-A82C-9F922F820988@jaram.net.au> References: <20111017132704.GE17572@ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> <38338D4E-DFE8-4053-A82C-9F922F820988@jaram.net.au> Message-ID: <20111017133741.GM17889@ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 09:36:37PM +0800, Jeremy Cole wrote: > > On 17/10/2011, at 9:27PM, Adrian Chadd wrote: > > > "what do we do if it breaks?" questions. > > > > Sorry... Is this the UCC I remember it being? Surely we will just hack away at it till it works like we want it to... When did UCC's internet last have unplanned downtime due to UCC members? From mattman at gmail.com Mon Oct 17 21:49:40 2011 From: mattman at gmail.com (Matt) Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 21:49:40 +0800 Subject: [tech] New UWA network interface options In-Reply-To: <20111017133525.GL17889@ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> References: <20111017133525.GL17889@ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> Message-ID: The Uni might do it cheaper for us (if it does need doing). Datatel's price was higher that the O'Donnell Griffin ones quoted in that email. Keep in mind that all cabling work needs to comply to the UWA Data and Communications specification, be done by a UWA inducted and registered contractor and come with a TCA1 notice from an ACMA licensed cabler. I can get Vince our sparky/comms guy to price it up if you like. [MRD] On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 9:35 PM, Matt Johnston wrote: > Can we get someone cheaper to install it? > > Matt From zanchey at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Mon Oct 17 22:26:52 2011 From: zanchey at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (David Adam) Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 22:26:52 +0800 (WST) Subject: [tech] New UWA network interface options In-Reply-To: <20111017132704.GE17572@ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> References: <20111017132704.GE17572@ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> Message-ID: On Mon, 17 Oct 2011, Adrian Chadd wrote: > On Mon, Oct 17, 2011, David Adam wrote: > > > The problem with the first option, which I discovered with a trill of gay > > laughter after having spent many hours trying to get it working, is that > > you can't connected any 100 megabit devices to a copper GBIC. However, I'm > > not convinced that our uplink copper cable will support gigabit traffic. > > Also I will ask the club for $50 to recoup part of the cost of new fans > > and GBICs. [*] > > Ah, no multi-rate gbics for the Cisco 3508? Shame. According to random web searches, multi-rate GBICs are Not A Thing, anywhere, ever. Gigabit Interface Card means just gigabit. > > Alternatively, if we can talk [AHC] into selling or donating the Cisco > > 2948G living in the machine room (which has 48 10/100 ports but two GBIC > > slots), we could use that if our uplink doesn't support Gigabit speeds. > > I'd honestly prefer you guys run some cat5e? :) Or get some fibre run? > Because any other solution is unfortunately filled with "what do we do if > it breaks?" questions. :/ Based on the prices [MRD] posted a little further down the list, I think getting a couple of pairs of copper run makes sense (if our current link won't do Gigabit, which I find highly likely). I know we're supposed to be moving to a different building in the not too distant future, but gigabit-ish Internet seems like something cool that we should do. I would donate $50 towards the project. [DAA] From trs80 at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Wed Oct 19 08:21:13 2011 From: trs80 at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (James Andrewartha) Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 08:21:13 +0800 (WST) Subject: [tech] New UWA network interface options In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, 17 Oct 2011, David Adam wrote: > The problem with the first option, which I discovered with a trill of gay > laughter after having spent many hours trying to get it working, is that > you can't connected any 100 megabit devices to a copper GBIC. However, I'm > not convinced that our uplink copper cable will support gigabit traffic. At $470, I don't think the cost of putting in a new uplink is prohibitive. I'll put in $50. Incidentally, madako will need to be upgraded/replaced as its uplink is only 100Mbit at the moment. > The problem with the second option is that it takes what is currently our > LAN switch out of commission and wastes 44 perfectly good copper ports. > However, with the new giant Cisco 4507R installed in the rack, we might be > migrating off coconut (same model as palm) sometime soon anyway, which > would negate this. My work has recently deprecated four Enterasys C2G124-48 switches, which have 48 port 10/100/1000baseTX ports with four shared SFP slots which could be used as LAN switches. -- # TRS-80 trs80(a)ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au #/ "Otherwise Bub here will do \ # UCC Wheel Member http://trs80.ucc.asn.au/ #| what squirrels do best | [ "There's nobody getting rich writing ]| -- Collect and hide your | [ software that I know of" -- Bill Gates, 1980 ]\ nuts." -- Acid Reflux #231 / From bob at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Wed Oct 19 09:40:24 2011 From: bob at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Bob Adamson) Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 09:40:24 +0800 (WST) Subject: [tech] New UWA network interface options In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 19 Oct 2011, James Andrewartha wrote: > Incidentally, madako will need to be upgraded/replaced as its uplink is > only 100Mbit at the moment. That's what murasoi is for - it has 4 gigabit interfaces, though I'm not sure what the backplane is capable of. Murasoi is a Sunfire X4200 and is currently running, but its setup needs maybe two hours to finish (routing, fw, vpn, others?). One of its power supplies died a few weeks back, a new one will cost us $145: http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/NEW-Sun-Microsystems-DS550-3-PSU-300-1945-03-/360256571486 Andrew Adamson UCC President bob at ucc.asn.au |"The faster you move, the slower time passes, the longer you live." | | ---Peter's Laws | From Adrian at Diskworld.com.au Sun Oct 23 09:48:26 2011 From: Adrian at Diskworld.com.au (Adrian Woodley) Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2011 09:48:26 +0800 Subject: [tech] New UWA network interface options In-Reply-To: References: <20111017133525.GL17889@ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> Message-ID: <4EA3726A.3000704@Diskworld.com.au> I have an Open Cabling license and am able to supply the relevant documentation from the regulatory side. How difficult is UWA registration/induction? With this license I am able to supervise the installation of cabling, so club members would be able to assist me with the work. This brings the cost down to member's time and the cable itself. AAW On 17/10/11 21:49, Matt wrote: > The Uni might do it cheaper for us (if it does need doing). > > Datatel's price was higher that the O'Donnell Griffin ones quoted in that email. > > Keep in mind that all cabling work needs to comply to the > UWA Data and Communications specification, be done by a UWA inducted > and registered contractor and come with a TCA1 notice from an ACMA > licensed cabler. > > I can get Vince our sparky/comms guy to price it up if you like. > > [MRD] > > On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 9:35 PM, Matt Johnston wrote: >> Can we get someone cheaper to install it? >> >> Matt From blinken at gmail.com Sun Oct 23 15:58:58 2011 From: blinken at gmail.com (Patrick Coleman) Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2011 15:58:58 +0800 Subject: [tech] New UWA network interface options In-Reply-To: References: <20111017132704.GE17572@ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> Message-ID: On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 10:26 PM, David Adam wrote: > I know we're supposed to be > moving to a different building in the not too distant future, but > gigabit-ish Internet seems like something cool that we should do. I would > donate $50 towards the project. Sure, so would I. Perhaps my sense of cost has been skewed by working for The Man, but $1300 for a singlemode fibre run in a building like Cameron Hall seems pretty reasonable. -Patrck From zanchey at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Mon Oct 31 17:29:02 2011 From: zanchey at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (David Adam) Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 17:29:02 +0800 (WST) Subject: [tech] New UWA network interface options In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, 17 Oct 2011, Bob Adamson wrote: > It seems to me that if the copper link doesn't support gigabit, then this > whole endeavour is pointless because we'll still have the 100mb bottleneck > that we've been trying so hard to get around. I say test the link, if it > doesn't do the speed, then we look at getting it replaced. So after testing the copper link, it doesn't support gigabit. There seems to be a reasonable degree of support for upgrading our links. Copper will apparently cost in the region of $500, maybe less if we get [AAW] to do it, and both [TRS] and I will put in some money towards it. [BOB] would like to run fibre the whole way so that we eliminate our reliance on the Cameron Hall comms room (in particular during power outages). The quote [MRD] posted is $1300, although in the committee meeting he said that he might be able to get that down by ordering a pre-terminated cable and getting that installed. If we go copper I think we should get two cables run; if we go with fibre we should get definitely get two pairs, because that's what will be run to us from the central network. Apparently we have been pushed down the list for connection to the new network but I think we should try and get a decision made at the next meeting (particularly if there are no further meetings planned until the end of November). My personal vote would be for fibre if we can get it for <$750 and copper otherwise - we may well be leaving the current building in the next eighteen months - but that's a committee decision and it would be nice if it was based on consensus and not swayed by strong personalities. David Adam UCC Wheel Member zanchey at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au