That is true for the ICX as well.

-----Original Message-----
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Olivier Benghozi
Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2015 9:13 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Experience Brocade ICX7750 and other vendor SFP

I don't know if ICX behave like the FCX, but on those equipments, 
other_vendor_SFPs work perfectly (Finisar, Skylane CWDM 70km, at least).
However the brocade won't let you use "optical-monitor" on them if they are 
"standard coded", so you won't be able to check optical values (tx/rx dBm 
levels and so on). Having the other_vendor_SFP coded as a "Brocade SFP" will do 
the trick however.

> Le 31 mars 2015 à 14:44, Joe McLeod <jmcl...@musfiber.net> a écrit :
> 
> +1 on Brocade ICX 6610 with other vendor's optics.  We're using the 6610's as 
> aggregation route/switches with a mix of Cisco, Alcatel, and 3rd party optics 
> (one of which is a 10G BiDi) and have had no issues.
> 
> Thanks,
> Joe
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Jordan 
> Medlen
> Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2015 8:09 AM
> To: Florian Figula
> Cc: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: Experience Brocade ICX7750 and other vendor SFP
> 
> I use the ICX 6610's which I believe run the same code train. I use other 
> vendor optics to light 3 spans of dark fiber, one of which is 60km, so I have 
> Axiom 80km optics in production there. I have had no issues. I also use the 
> VDX series switches with other vendor optics and no issues.
> 
> Jordan Medlen
> Network Engineer
> Bisk Education
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Mar 31, 2015, at 05:55, Florian Figula <flor...@figula.de> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> does anyone have experiences regarding Brocade ICX7750 and other vendors SFP.
>> 
>> Information will be helpful for planing new infrastructure and costs.
>> 
>> Thanks to all!



--
This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, 
and is believed to be clean.


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

Reply via email to