RE: Please confirm (conf#16402a20a9692175a5c9eb0e81604429)

From: Darren Hosking (dhosking@commander.com)
Date: Fri Oct 24 2003 - 06:23:39 GMT-3


        -----Original Message-----
        From: ccielab@groupstudy.com [mailto:ccielab@groupstudy.com]
        Sent: Fri 24/10/2003 7:20 PM
        To: Darren Hosking
        Cc:
        Subject: Please confirm (conf#16402a20a9692175a5c9eb0e81604429)
        
        

        Hi,
        
        You have tried to post to GroupStudy.com's CCIELab mailing list. Because the
        server does not recognize you as a confirmed poster, you will be required to
        authenticate that you are using a valid e-mail address and are not a
        spammer.
        
        PLEASE DO NOT SEND YOUR ORIGINAL MESSAGE AGAIN! BY CONFIRMING THIS EMAIL
        YOUR ORIGINAL MESSAGE (WHICH IS NOW QUEUED IN THE SERVER) WILL BE POSTED.
        
        By confirming this e-mail you certify that you understand the following:
        
        1. The message does NOT break Cisco's Non-Disclosure requirements.
        
        2. The message is NOT designed to advertise a commercial product.
        
        3. All postings become property of GroupStudy.com
        
        4. You have searched the archives prior to posting.
        
        5. The message is NOT inflammatory.
        
        6. The message is NOT a test message.
        
        To confirm, simply reply to this message. No editing is necessary. Once
        confirmed, you will be able to post without additional confirmations.
        
        
        Welcome to GroupStudy.com!
        
        
        ------ORIGINAL MESSAGE---------
        
        From dhosking@commander.com Fri Oct 24 09:20:30 2003
        Received: from m1.commander.com (m1.commander.com [203.44.7.132])
                by groupstudy.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h9O9KRhD004151
                GroupStudy Mailer; Fri, 24 Oct 2003 09:20:29 GMT
        Received: from mx1.commander.com ([172.24.24.7]) by m1.commander.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329);
                 Fri, 24 Oct 2003 19:20:10 +1000
        X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0
        content-class: urn:content-classes:message
        MIME-Version: 1.0
        Content-Type: text/plain;
                charset="utf-8"
        Subject: can you turn a 6500 sup1a-pfc into a sup1a-2ge
        Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2003 19:20:10 +1000
        Message-ID: <1052AE622EEA6F48936D2775E43BE5270269F928@hoexch01.commander.com>
        X-MS-Has-Attach:
        X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
        Thread-Topic: can you turn a 6500 sup1a-pfc into a sup1a-2ge
        Thread-Index: AcOaEAXSMhbitWB8RxeTJi2LKA5GSg==
        From: "Darren Hosking" <dhosking@commander.com>
        To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
        X-OriginalArrivalTime: 24 Oct 2003 09:20:10.0921 (UTC) FILETIME=[061CC990:01C39A10]
        Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
        X-MIME-Autoconverted: from base64 to 8bit by groupstudy.com id h9O9KRhD004151
        
        The sup1a-pfc is just a sup1a-2ge with a pfc daughter board factory installed (I believe). Is it possible to remove the PFC daughter board to turn the sup1a-pfc back into a sup1a-2ge?
        
        Has anyone done this?
        
        Are there any risks?
        
        The data sheets say that the sup1a-2ge is NOT field upgradable so I'm concerned there may be some reason this can't be done (ie if you can't field install maybe you can't field un-install).
        
        The reason I want to do this is to have redundant sup1a-2ge's and I already have the sup1a-pfc so it would be cheaper to remove the PFC. Alternatively, can the sup1a-pfc be a redundant supervisor for the sup1a-2ge with the PFC still installed?
        
        Any advice appreciated.
        
                   Thanks, Darren



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Nov 24 2003 - 07:53:07 GMT-3