re: Procket Gets UnstealthyLook at the datasheet for PRO/8812 and it says that the maximum DC input power (estimated) is 7000W. Do the math; input current of 25A at 40V is 1000W not 7000W!!! Now look up the data sheet for PRO/8801 and the maximum DC input power is 1000W (25A at 40V). Looks like they have just cut and pasted whatever is in 8801 to 8812 leading one to question whether the 8812 is for real?
Another case in point; the 8812 datasheet shows 3 (2+1) power entry modules. All the COs I know have only 2 power rails A and B. Was this also copied from the 8801 data sheet which has AC power inputs?
What can we really believe in the PRO/8812 datasheet?
re: Procket Gets UnstealthyI don't see any value Procket is bringing in to the service providers. Yeh... it is VLSI, yeh.. it is new routing code from scratch.. What do they offer to the user ?
Is it reliability ? Who will believe that a completely new routing sw be more reliable than the ones that have been running in the network for years ?
How about the AI stuff ? It is no more than marketing. I hope it won't screw things up. No service providers will be stupid enough to turn them on.
re: Procket Gets UnstealthyIn the absence of a public offering, a start-up will need to get a lot of customer success to survive. The VC's will not fork out more dough without seeing paying customers and future potential.
The public has been burned and has more immediate problems than making insiders rich, so agreed that their won't be a public offering anytime soon. I guess that means we have to go back to the days of building real companies that solve real problems for real (and paying) customers.
Achieving profitably when your name is spelled "other" has proven to be difficult."
re: Procket Gets Unstealthy>>>Look at the datasheet for PRO/8812 and it says >>>that the maximum DC input power (estimated) is >>>7000W.
I think the spec sheet means to say the nominal current draw is 25 Amps for a minimal 8812 system (the minimal system for a 8812 is apparently the same as for a maximum-standard 8801.. there is apparently only one 8801 configuration...
>>>Do the math; input current of 25A at 40V is 1000W >>>not 7000W!!!
A fully loaded 8812 system, running at worst hot temp and low voltage, would prob draw about 6500-7000 watts ... this is based on my _COMPLETE_ reading of the spec sheets (including the line card, media cards, et al) and looking at all the slots I could fill, and making an educated engineering guess.
7000 Watts at low station battery Voltage (42 Volts) = ~175 Amps. This seems in line with other systems I have seen... I will grant you that I think it could be clearer that the spec should state that it is for minimal system config, but I also think a closer look-see at the entire set of spec sheets shows the 7000W figure is prob correct.
>>>Another case in point; the 8812 datasheet shows >>>3 (2+1) power entry modules. All the COs I know >>>have only 2 power rails A and B. Was this also >>>copied from the 8801 data sheet which has AC >power inputs?
Um...you might want to re-read the 8801 data sheet again... apparently the 8801 can be an AC or a DC powered unit....and there are only two power supply modules for AC or two modules to filter/condition the DC, not three as you indicated. See the data sheet for 8801 again.... it says "Power Entry Modules (1 + 1 redundant)". I would say the 3(2+1) for 8812 was not copied.
re: Procket Gets UnstealthyA quick call to 408.635.7900 (Procket HQ number listed on their web site) resulted in an explaination that the info on spec sheet should have read max. ~175 amps, not 25 amps so daffyduck is right on. They also stated that the number of power entry modules on the 8812 are 1+1, not 2+1 as listed. Both spec sheets were being reworked and will be released soon.
I also happened to mention that some people believe that the 8812 is just vaporware based on the flaws found in the spec sheet... The response I got was quite funny - they said "better not let that vaporware land on your toes, its quite heavy.." Looks like about 571 pounds of heavy.
re: Procket Gets UnstealthyThe guaranteed low battery voltage at the terminals of your device is -40V. This is based on a review of all the major NA service providers. Take it to the bank.
The -36V comes from the minimum working voltage of the power supplies but you have to get through a lot of voltage drops until you get there. Voltage drop also equals power dissipation!
The -42V statement is probably from an old CO powering requirements for the Class 5 switches.
In the end, -36, -40 or -42 will all give you lots of heat dissipation in a small volume. Operating companies just hate this trend but they are like drug addicts and can't stop themselves from continuously more concentrated power producing boxes. Bizarre.
re: Procket Gets Unstealthy>> It will be good if Procket can prove each line card can take 40Gbps in and forward 40Gbps out, preferably by a third party test lab.
heheheh - you can't do that on an OS simulator with some NICs? they are always going to be behind 2.5 other vendors when it comes to feature support and proven stability. dreaming up something in the boom and executing today will be a challenge when trying to capture, or even penetrate, this tough and tight industry.
I agree coding from scratch will for certain have more bugs than a code that has been tested.
The reason third party software companies are doing well, is because they have changed their architecture to be modular(so you can have distributed processing for an RP), besides you do not need to maintain big teams to support the code. Though for certain the response time will be far slower in case of critical problems.
Another case in point; the 8812 datasheet shows 3 (2+1) power entry modules. All the COs I know have only 2 power rails A and B. Was this also copied from the 8801 data sheet which has AC power inputs?
What can we really believe in the PRO/8812 datasheet?