From: Scott Morris (smorris@ipexpert.com)
Date: Thu Apr 12 2007 - 00:14:55 ART
In my experience, Cisco (and other manufacturers) appear to list the
theorhetical maximum based on whatever configuration you are going to have.
I don't think I've ever had a unit hit the number listed by a manufacturer.
But if you're using it for planning, you know you will ALWAYS be covered by
using those numbers. But you'll also spend a lot of extra money! :)
Scott Morris, CCIE4 (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/Service Provider) #4713, JNCIE
#153, CISSP, et al.
CCSI/JNCI-M/JNCI-J
IPexpert VP - Curriculum Development
IPexpert Sr. Technical Instructor
smorris@ipexpert.com
http://www.ipexpert.com
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of Brad
Ellis
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 10:57 PM
To: Cisco certification
Subject: actual BTUs vs. Cisco's listed BTUs
We're seeing a huge discrepency in our rack room HVAC calculations. We're
showing cisco's mfg listed 2811 router btu's to be 580. However, when we
actually check the power the router is using, we're getting closer to
123BTUs. Since we have over 400 of these devices, this is a HUGE difference
in the amount of cooling needed for our rack room. I've typically done HVAC
calcs in the past using the manufacture #s, but with the difference being
this big, it means the $$ difference between $15k additional cooling and
$100k additional cooling. Is this a typical discrepency with Cisco devices?
(Yes, I understand it depends on what modules are in the devices, the fan
speed of the router, etc). Just was looking for other's thoughts.
thanks,
Brad Ellis
CCIE#5796 (R&S / Security)
CCSI#30482
Network Learning Inc - A Cisco Sponsored Organization (SO)
YES! We take Cisco Learning credits!
brad@ccbootcamp.com
www.ccbootcamp.com (Cisco Training and Advanced Technology Rental Racks)
Voice: 702-968-5100
FAX: 702-446-8012
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue May 01 2007 - 08:28:35 ART