Re: Remote power cycle recommendations

[Stephen Satchell <list () satchell net>]

On 04/30/2018 10:05 AM, William Herrin wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 12:19 PM, Brielle Bruns<bruns () 2mbit com>  wrote:
> > In particular, if at all possible, do not use the AP9606 era cards with the
> > APCs.  They are 10BaseT and take fragile to a whole new level.  I usually
> > have to manually force the port to 10 on the switch or put it on a cheap
> > dumb older switch.
> They're fragile but they're not_that_  fragile. A switch that can't
> figure out 10 mbps half duplex... now that's fragile.

Personally, I've not run into THAT problem in years.  What I have run 
into is when you have a 10base-T target and you connect it to a 
100base-T (or faster) infrastructure, the switch as part of the rate 
changing will tend to flood the poor embedded stack if your application 
layer isn't very, very careful to space out packets.

At best your embedded-stack device will lose packets.  At worst, you 
will have to power-cycle the poor dear in order to get it to start 
listening to the network again.

Let me repeat, this observation is not restricted to the AP9606 cards; 
it seems to be an issue with embedded-stack devices in general.

Subject change:  one other thing about the AP9606 cards:  they have a 
battery on them, and you do have to change that battery every decade or 
so...