3rd Party GBICs

Discussion in 'Cisco' started by Bill F, Oct 19, 2004.

  1. Bill F

    Bill F Guest

    Apparently Cisco doesn't approve any 3rd party gbics for their switches.
    However, the products are out there. Anyone know if this part is
    comparable to cisco's 5484 part? Any reason not to go with it other
    than potential tac support issues?

    AGILENT - Shortwave, 850 nm, Fiber GBIC, SC connection Part No#
    HFBR-5601
     
    Bill F, Oct 19, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. :Apparently Cisco doesn't approve any 3rd party gbics for their switches.
    : However, the products are out there. Anyone know if this part is
    :comparable to cisco's 5484 part? Any reason not to go with it other
    :than potential tac support issues?

    :AGILENT - Shortwave, 850 nm, Fiber GBIC, SC connection Part No#
    :HFBR-5601

    I do not recognize the part number, but I recognize the company name
    and I would expect that their devices should be up to GBIC spec.

    I gather that Cisco generally sells GBICs that are built to
    tolerances tighter than the spec. People here have several times related
    that with a Cisco GBIC and decent fibre, they were able to go
    significantly beyond the nominal distance limitations. With the
    Aligent and decent fibre, you would likely also be able to exceed
    the nominal distance limitations, but not necessarily by as much.

    In some Cisco kits, Cisco reads the GBIC ID and will refuse to
    turn on the connection if it isn't marked as being from Cisco.
    Sorry, I cannot give any particular instances of that; my only
    datapoint is that the 9-port ethernet card for the 5500 series does
    not care about the GBIC SX or LX model. I would tend to expect
    more limitations as you get into the wavelength multiplexers
    (e.g., CDWM) for which tolerances are much more crucial.
     
    Walter Roberson, Oct 20, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. its funny, cause it is Agilent GBICs that Cisco uses....
    I have also tried some from a brocade silkworm SAN switch in C3550 - this
    works perfectly aswell

    you can get non-cisco GBIC from alot of places.
    BUT your support goes down the drain, from Cisco's side.

    HTH
    Martin
     
    Martin Bilgrav, Oct 21, 2004
    #3
  4. We have 3750 switches with GBICs. I fell in the trap of tendering for
    these with the part number from Cisco, only to find that purchasing
    was accepting bids for "equivalent" parts. The "equivalant" parts got
    us into trouble. They didn't work, but legally purchasing (being
    government)couldn't refuse the bid.

    I plan to write future tenders much more carefully. But on point, at
    least on the equipment we have been buying the non-Cisco GBICs just
    don't work.
     
    Trent Collicutt, Oct 22, 2004
    #4
  5. Bill F

    Steinar Haug Guest

    [Trent Collicutt]

    | > its funny, cause it is Agilent GBICs that Cisco uses....
    | > I have also tried some from a brocade silkworm SAN switch in C3550 - this
    | > works perfectly aswell
    | >
    | > you can get non-cisco GBIC from alot of places.
    | > BUT your support goes down the drain, from Cisco's side.

    We have not had this problem - we use lots of third party GBICs and
    SFPs. Never had a problem with support.

    | We have 3750 switches with GBICs. I fell in the trap of tendering for
    | these with the part number from Cisco, only to find that purchasing
    | was accepting bids for "equivalent" parts. The "equivalant" parts got
    | us into trouble. They didn't work, but legally purchasing (being
    | government)couldn't refuse the bid.
    |
    | I plan to write future tenders much more carefully. But on point, at
    | least on the equipment we have been buying the non-Cisco GBICs just
    | don't work.

    3750s are somewhat special in that they actively check the IDs of the
    SFPs. Note that it is possible to find third party SFPs (for instance
    from Zycko) which are known to work in 3750s. Should this situation
    change, it would be an excellent argument for *not* purchasing 3750s,
    at least for us.

    Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting,
     
    Steinar Haug, Oct 22, 2004
    #5
  6. :We have 3750 switches with GBICs. I fell in the trap of tendering for
    :these with the part number from Cisco, only to find that purchasing
    :was accepting bids for "equivalent" parts. The "equivalant" parts got
    :us into trouble. They didn't work, but legally purchasing (being
    :government)couldn't refuse the bid.

    For our edification: did the 3750 refuse the GBICs? Did it accept
    them but they wouldn't pass data? Were the third party ones flakey?


    I was looking at the specs for the very new 4948 switch last night
    (48 port @ 10/100/100 + 4 x SPF, multi-level), and noticed in the
    Cisco documentation a firmly worded "recommendation" to only
    use Cisco SPF's. The next sentance indicated that the Cisco SPFs
    have information stored on them that the device will read to ensure
    that the SPF will work. If one reads the two sentances together,
    one would be left with the impression that the 4948 will refuse
    anything other than Cisco SPFs, but it doesn't -quite- say that.
     
    Walter Roberson, Oct 22, 2004
    #6
  7. Bill F

    stephen Guest

    i have seen some explicit statements from Cisco TAC that they will not
    support systems with 3rd party memory, flash, GBICs and other add ons rather
    than with real cisco parts.

    Whether this is even legal within both US and europe is an open Q - Compaq
    got kicked pretty badly a few years back for similar policies on 3rd party
    memory.

    1 relatively easy way around this is to specify that the devices must work
    in the cisco gear, and must not compromise your support contract (with cisco
    or reseller or whatever you use) - then it becomes more of a due diligence
    issue for the supplier.

    Certainly if you use Smartnet support i would want to be careful oin what is
    fitted to kit on swap out contracts.
    I believe that various bits of cisco gear also check the GBIC IDs- we had
    this flagged from cisco - i think it was on newer blades for Catalyst 4ks
    and 6ks.

    AFAIK cisco dont make GBICs (maybe they build the Gigastack stuff
    themselves) - so the same part from the actual manufacturer should be OK -
    unless cisco have a non standard ID set up during manufacture.

    the one it hurts most on are the high power GBICs such as CWDM - these are
    expensive ($5k each list), and you may have to wait to get them, but
    underneath the label Cisco and Nortel both used to use Finisar.....
     
    stephen, Oct 22, 2004
    #7
  8. Time to start a vendor gear black list. I will actively avoid buying
    such stupid lock-in games playing gear.

    So anyone with facts about which gear (no matter what vendor) rejects
    non-vendor-branded GBIC/SFPs, please let me know by mail, I'll compile
    and sum up (perhaps even publish on a web page so people can check
    back on next purchase round on what gear to avoid if possible).


    Regards,
    Daniel
     
    Daniel Roesen, Oct 24, 2004
    #8
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.