Folks,
I've been tempted by the NANOG PC into trying to run some "Lightning Debates" at NANOG 51 in Miami. The idea, similar to lighting talks, is a 30 minute session, covering 3 debate topics, 10 minutes each. Each person would get 5 minutes to argue their side of the issue.
Some ideas so far:
UPS Systems: Battery vs. Flywheel
Cooling: Raised floor vs. Underfloor
Power: AC vs. DC
Ethernet: 40GE vs. 100GE
Optics: XFP vs. SFP+
Address Families: IPv4 vs. IPv6
I'm soliciting panelists, and ideas. Please let me know if you're interested in participating in what will hopefully be a unique and exciting session.
Best,
Tom
Folks,
I've been tempted by the NANOG PC into trying to run some "Lightning Debates" at NANOG 51 in Miami. The idea, similar to lighting talks, is a 30 minute session, covering 3 debate topics, 10 minutes each. Each person would get 5 minutes to argue their side of the issue.
Some ideas so far:
UPS Systems: Battery vs. Flywheel
Which side will be represented by the folks from 365 Main?
Cooling: Raised floor vs. Underfloor
What about overhead (which is the usual opposite to underfloor
which is the same as raised floor in most cases)
Power: AC vs. DC
I think this is more context sensitive and that a one-size fits all argument
on either side wouldn't make much sense.
Ethernet: 40GE vs. 100GE
ROFL
Optics: XFP vs. SFP+
This is a debate topic? Really?
Address Families: IPv4 vs. IPv6
Ooh... This one might be interesting.
Owen
Cooling: Raised floor vs. Underfloor
forgive me, but what is the difference between raised floor and underfloor?
Ethernet: 40GE vs. 100GE
people are debating which is better? really?
Optics: XFP vs. SFP+
?
some interesting choices of things to debate.. are these serious debate sessions or more for fun?
I have a suggestion...
Nanog Mailing List: Critical Operational Content vs. Break time Amusement
*ducks*
Greg,
forgive me, but what is the difference between raised floor and
underfloor?
Excuse me. Raised floor vs. overhead.
> Ethernet: 40GE vs. 100GE
people are debating which is better? really?
I'm sure someone has an opinion...
> Optics: XFP vs. SFP+
?
some interesting choices of things to debate.. are these serious
debate sessions or more for fun?
They are meant to be informative. Maybe you have no idea on what XFP or SFP+ is because you've been running a Gigabit based network and haven't made the jump to 10GE yet - the debate might give you the top 3-5 points on why each might be the right option for you. And then, of course, there is a fun factor.
Tom
They are meant to be informative. Maybe you have no idea on what XFP or
SFP+ is because you've been running a Gigabit based network and haven't
made the jump to 10GE yet - the debate might give you the top 3-5
points on why each might be the right option for you. And then, of
course, there is a fun factor.
Tom
In most cases it isn't an option, you use what the hardware uses. I can't decide to use an SFP+ in a unit with XFP form factor. I select the hardware according to the features I need and then buy the optics it requires, I don't select the hardware based on the optics modules it uses. The only drawback I have seen so far is finding ER optics in SFP+ form factor but they might be available now (I couldn't find them a year or so ago).
A good topic might be ipv6 migration strategies: dual stack or native v6 with nat64/dns64
Excuse me. Raised floor vs. overhead.
ahh that makes much more sense, thanks Tom.
I'm sure someone has an opinion…
i suspect you are correct, not sure who would elect for the slower standard, considering they hit the streets fairly close to each other and I can't see there being a huge difference in cost, but i could be wrong. (the isp i'm connected to is running100G now)
Optics: XFP vs. SFP+
Maybe you have no idea on what XFP or SFP+ is because you've been running a Gigabit based network and haven't made the jump to 10GE yet -
i've more 10G ports than you can shake a stick at actually… my '?' was again, people debate this? as the bit rates are verbatum, the major difference which one would choose the other over from my understanding was distance to endpoint.. but again i could be wrong… wishing now i didn't send anything. 8)
-g
In most cases it isn't an option, you use what the hardware uses. I
can't decide to use an SFP+ in a unit with XFP form factor. I select
the hardware according to the features I need and then buy the optics
it requires, I don't select the hardware based on the optics modules
it uses. The only drawback I have seen so far is finding ER optics in
SFP+ form factor but they might be available now (I couldn't find them
a year or so ago).
George,
Good point. Perhaps the context should be more nebulous? Given a choice in an ideal word, not limited by the selection of hardware manufactures, which do you prefer? ras did a good talk on optics in the past, I'm sure there's some points to discuss.
A good topic might be ipv6 migration strategies: dual stack or native
v6 with nat64/dns64
Alright, added. Are you volunteering to speak to one point or the other?
Thanks,
Tom
Greg,
i suspect you are correct, not sure who would elect for the slower
standard, considering they hit the streets fairly close to each other
and I can't see there being a huge difference in cost, but i could be
wrong. (the isp i'm connected to is running100G now)
Regarding 40G/100G, I'm sure some in the NANOG community have some feeling towards 40G as it was intended to be a server platform standard. With architectures such as 1aq, TRILL, VL2, etc, there may be some grounds here. What's the good of 100G if you can't push the PPS, for example. Just a thought...
i've more 10G ports than you can shake a stick at actually… my '?'
was again, people debate this? as the bit rates are verbatum, the
major difference which one would choose the other over from my
understanding was distance to endpoint.. but again i could be wrong…
wishing now i didn't send anything. 8)
Nah, send away. What debate were you volunteering to take a position on again? 
Tom
Hi Tom,
I think this could work. However, instead of in terms of X versus Y,
I'd suggest coming up with some proposition, such as "You need to be
deploying IPv6 right now" and let people sign up for the affirmative or
negative.
John
Even more interesting is the 100GE Optics debate. Standardized (expensive and very scarce) 100GBASE-LR4 vs non-standard but cheaper and easier to manufacture LR10 (based on 10x 10Gbit/s on a very narrow DWDM-grid)..
Jac
I agree, I just joined the list today and was about to unsubscribe because of all the realtively useless posts <ducks behind Leo>
This is nanog-futures stuff and/or community meeting stuff.
Kris
From: Tom Daly
Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2010 12:41 PM
To: George Bonser
Cc: nanog@nanog.org; Greg Whynott
Subject: Re: Lightning Debates at NANOG 51
> A good topic might be ipv6 migration strategies: dual stack or
native
> v6 with nat64/dns64
Alright, added. Are you volunteering to speak to one point or the
other?
I might be happy to submit something written but won't be able to get there in person. Being a sole full-time parent causes some adjustment in priorities.
I would certainly be interested in the opinions of others, too.