welcome: please sign in

Diff for "Hardware"

Differences between revisions 20 and 55 (spanning 35 versions)
Revision 20 as of 2006-06-25 14:04:17
Size: 7811
Comment: Added 3Com switch recommendation, comment on MichaelOlson's Netgear switch rec.
Revision 55 as of 2006-10-28 05:32:26
Size: 4086
Editor: user-0cdf0qs
Comment:
Deletions are marked like this. Additions are marked like this.
Line 1: Line 1:
= New System Hardware = This page collects information on the hardware we plan to install at a colocation provider as part of our new hosting infrastructure. Some older discussion and similar stuff is on NewSystemHardwareArchive.
Line 3: Line 3:
During the HCoop IRC meeting on June 24, 2006, the group decided that it would based it's new system architecture on the following pieces of hardware: = System setup =
Currently, what we know are the uses for the three machines we will base our infrastructure on. We also know our Abulafia machine configuration, and Justin Leitgeb's to-be-donated server configuration. What we need to come up with, is the ideal setup for the third machine that we will have to buy. So, the machine configurations and intended uses follow:
Line 5: Line 6:
 * Two robust servers, one that doesn't allow normal user logins, and one that does.
 * One switch to form a LAN between these servers.
 * One serial port device, to facilitate remote access to our servers.
== Justin Leitgeb's donation: Dell PowerEdge 2850 ==
 * Processor: 2 x 2.8 GHz
 * RAM: 4 GB
 * Disks:
  * 4 x 10K Seagate Cheetah SCSI drives, 73GB '''and'''
  * 2 x 10K Seagate Cheetah SCSI drives, 36GB
 * Extra: RAID kit, with battery, etc., 256 MB RAID cache, 2 power supplies
'''Intended use: fileserver and host for all services that don't involve dynamic content provided by non-admins. No user logins.'''
Line 9: Line 15:
Also, it was mentioned that we should research hardware support contracts from any vendor that will be selling us equipment. == HCoop's currently-underused machine Abulafia ==
 * Processor: 1 x 900 MHz
 * RAM: 512 MB
 * Disks: 40 GB RAID 1 (2 x 40 GB 7200 RPM ATA drives)
 * Extra: 3Ware 6400 PCI ATA RAID controller
'''Intended use: refurbished slightly to serve as a generic shell server and the only machine where usage not strictly related to "Internet hosting" is permitted.'''
Line 11: Line 22:
Additionally, group decided that the server that HCoop currently owns, Abulafia, will be brought to he.net for shell service. This will follow a necessary re-load of the OS software at a time to be determined later. == Ray Racine's donation: Sun Fire v20 ==
* Processor: AMD64
 * RAM: ?
 * Disks: 2 x 36 GB Ultra320 SCSI (hot swap)
 * 1U
Line 13: Line 28:
This page will serve as a forum for collaborative research on the pieces of hardware that we need. <!--
 * 3 year, on-site hardware support (only adds $119) (?)
 * Penguin Model: Altus 1300
 * List price: $2702.00
 * Extra: Should be 1U. Goal is to make it processor intensive, and only disk-heavy enough to ensure a high level of uptime. Other considerations such as a preference for AMD and the vendor Penguin Computing that have been expressed on the list and in meetings should be followed here. More information from online configuration: [http://www.hcoop.net/~leitgebj/hcoop_servers/altus_1300_20060606_3.pdf (PDF)] [http://www.hcoop.net/~leitgebj/hcoop_servers/altus_1300_20060606_3.ps (PS)] -->
Line 15: Line 34:
== Servers == '''Intended use: dynamic web content and any other Internet services that involve running arbitrary code from members (including custom daemons, etc.)'''
Line 17: Line 36:
We will be purchasing two servers, which will be configured and sent to he.net for colocation. == Switch ==
We are proceeding under the assumption that we'll use ShaunEmpie's donation (see HardwareDonations), a Nortel (Baystack) 380 switch. He says:
Line 19: Line 39:
=== Desired Features === It is not brand new but is working. Here is [http://vpit.net/es380-guide.pdf a guide] that I was able to find to give anyone interested a more in depth view of it.
Line 21: Line 41:
These servers should be as redundant as possible. At this point, we cannot afford to have less than one point of failure in many areas, so we should look for the following features in our new servers: VLAN Configuration Proposal:
Line 23: Line 43:
 * Redundant power supplies.
 * Hardware RAID.
 * Dual CPU's, AMD seems to be a stronger option than Intel
{{{
With our new setup, I think it would be best to setup a few different
VLANs for different uses. For anyone who is unfamiliar with the term, a
VLAN is a virtual lan. It allows you to have completely separate networks
on the same switch. This will allow us to setup a private network that
the public and peer1 would have no access to. This could be handy for
database systems, NAS, backup servers, etc which you'd want to keep off
the public network.
Line 27: Line 52:
==== Differences Between the Servers ==== Proposed Configuration:
Line 29: Line 54:
The admin-only server will hopefully be serving an AFS file system, which means that fancier kinds of RAID are justified there. The all-members server can get away with cheaper (and maybe even faster) solutions for local disk access. VLAN 1. Management VLAN - not used for normal traffic
Line 31: Line 56:
JustinLeitgeb thinks that perhaps RAID 1 would work on the all-members server, and either RAID 5 or RAID 10 on the admin server. It should be RAID 10 if we can afford it, or RAID 5 if we're shorter on cash. :) VLAN 10. Public VLAN - public/Peer1's network
Line 33: Line 58:
There may be other factors influencing different configuration choices between the servers. VLAN 20. Private VLAN - private subnet for inter-server traffic
Line 35: Line 60:
=== Proposed Models and Vendors === For a starting point i think having ports 1-12 in VLAN 10 and ports 13-24
in VLAN 20 would be best. The VLAN membership of a port can be changed
easily so these would not be set in stone.
Line 37: Line 64:
Vendors: The switch allows for many more VLANs than we'll ever need so if anyone
has a suggestion or need for another VLAN it would be trivial to setup.
Any questions/comments, let me know.
Line 39: Line 68:
 * [http://www.penguincomputing.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=172&Itemid=230 Penguin Computing]
 * [http://www.dell.com/ Dell]
 * [http://www.monarchcomputer.com/Merchant2/merchant.mv?Screen=CTGY&Store_Code=M&Category_Code=allracks Monarch Computer Systems]
-Shaun}}}
Line 43: Line 70:
Models: ES380 AC Power Specs:
Line 45: Line 72:
 * Possible web server configuration from [http://www.penguincomputing.com Penguin] [http://www.hcoop.net/~leitgebj/hcoop_servers/penguin_web_server.ps (postscript)] [http://www.hcoop.net/~leitgebj/hcoop_servers/penguin_web_server.pdf (PDF)]
 * Possible admin server configuration from [http://www.penguincomputing.com Penguin] [http://www.hcoop.net/~leitgebj/hcoop_servers/penguin_admin_server.ps (postscript)] [http://www.hcoop.net/~leitgebj/hcoop_servers/penguin_admin_server.pdf (PDF)]
 * Possible web server from [http://www.dell.com/ Dell] [http://www.hcoop.net/~leitgebj/hcoop_servers/dell_web_server.ps (postscript)] [http://www.hcoop.net/~leitgebj/hcoop_servers/dell_web_server.pdf (PDF)], based on the Dell PowerEdge 1850.
 * Possible admin server from [http://www.dell.com/ Dell] [http://www.hcoop.net/~leitgebj/hcoop_servers/dell_admin_server.ps (postscript)] [http://www.hcoop.net/~leitgebj/hcoop_servers/dell_admin_server.pdf (PDF)], based on the Dell PowerEdge 2850 (offers more space for hard disks in our primary file server).
 * Possible admin server configuration from [http://www.penguincomputing.com Penguin], using the 2U server, redundant power supplies, and RAID 5 [http://www.hcoop.net/~leitgebj/hcoop_servers/penguin_admin_raid5_server.ps (postscript)] [http://www.hcoop.net/~leitgebj/hcoop_servers/penguin_admin_raid5_server.pdf (PDF)]
 * Possible admin server configuration from [http://www.penguincomputing.com Penguin], using the 2U server, redundant power supplies, and RAID 10 [http://www.hcoop.net/~leitgebj/hcoop_servers/penguin_admin_raid10_server_2200.ps (postscript)] [http://www.hcoop.net/~leitgebj/hcoop_servers/penguin_admin_raid10_server_2200.pdf (PDF)]
 * Input current: 1.5A to 100 AC
 * Input voltage (rms): 100 to 240 VAC at 47 to 63 Hz
 * Power consumption: 150 W
 * Thermal rating: 1000 BTU/hr maximum
Line 52: Line 77:
Note that when I checked Dell dropped something like $1200 off of the price of each server over $4000, so we should expect some significant discounts. Whichever company we plan on going with, we may be able to negotiate lower prices by emphasizing that we may buy more in the future, etc. With the Penguin models, we seem to have to go to the 2U, Altus 2200 in order to get a redundant power supply. == Serial console ==
Line 54: Line 79:
== Ethernet Switch ==

=== Desired Features ===

 * Gigabit
 * 5 ports minimum
 * Managed - so that we can troubleshoot failed NIC's easier
 * Rack-mountable, so that vibration and heat issues are diminished.
 * SNMP monitoring capability

=== Additional Information ===

He.net sent us the following when asked about switch configurations at their site:

''We've got customers using everything from ElCheapoSwitch(tm) to Cisco-grade equipment. The main difference between the two is how much traffic they can deal with, the number of packets they can deal with, and how they can be accesses/monitored. If you're looking at pushing primarily web traffic (<50Mb/s) and do not require any of the more advanced functionality of a managed switch, you could likely just go with a good unmanaged switch. If you were doing higher traffic levels, streaming, or other such traffic which consist of a zillion little packets, especially if it's between your servers, you would be better served by something a bit higher grade.''


=== Proposed Models and Vendors ===

==== Vendors ====

[http://newegg.com/ Newegg] has been recommended to several of us.

==== Models =====

===== NETGEAR GS108 10/100/1000Mbps =====

[http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16833122111 Netgear GS108 Switch ]: Highly-rated Netgear switch that is not rack-mountable

Price: ($56.99)

MichaelOlson thinks that we should go with the Netgear switch. It has been rated as a very reliable product, and is very affordable.

I don't like this switch for the following reasons:

1) It is not rack-mountable, meaning that it could raise issues for cooling in the rack, and be more susceptible to shock that could reduce reliability of the switch, or jar patch cables out of the ports.
2) It is not managed, so we can't track important information about performance and possible NIC failures via SNMP.

Basically, I think that if we're going to pay all of this money for equipment and hosting, we shouldn't put an interconnect with insufficient features in the middle of our architecture. But, I'm not a networking expert, so I would welcome any opinions contrary to this! JustinLeitgeb

===== Level One GSW-1655 10/100/1000Mbps =====

 * ($249.99) Level One 16-port rack-mountable switch [[http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16833118021 link ]]

I've never heard of this brand (Level 1?) so I don't trust it. Any reviews? JustinLeitgeb

===== 3Com® SuperStack® 3 Switch 3812 =====

[http://www.3com.com/products/en_US/detail.jsp?tab=features&pathtype=purchase&sku=3C17401 3Com® SuperStack® 3 Switch 3812] seems to have most of the features that we need, with a bit of room to grow. Prices range from $1000 to $1500 on [http://froogle.google.com Froogle], in my experience [http://www.cdw.com CDW] is a reliable vendor. Perhaps we should make a jump and get the 24 port, which would support our use of an entire rack in the future, if the price difference is small?

I think that we should look for something in this range, but would welcome critiques -- I'm not a network tech! JustinLeitgeb


== Serial Port ==

Docelic, or other users -- please update this section since I am entirely ignorant about these devices! :)

=== Desired Features ===

=== Proposed Models and Vendors ===

[http://www.cyclades.com/ Cyclades] was mentioned as one vendor of serial port devices which are linux-friendly.
Some device to simulate local login over the Internet could be a life saver. JustinLeitgeb mentions a special card that Dell sells that would work with his donation.

This page collects information on the hardware we plan to install at a colocation provider as part of our new hosting infrastructure. Some older discussion and similar stuff is on NewSystemHardwareArchive.

1. System setup

Currently, what we know are the uses for the three machines we will base our infrastructure on. We also know our Abulafia machine configuration, and Justin Leitgeb's to-be-donated server configuration. What we need to come up with, is the ideal setup for the third machine that we will have to buy. So, the machine configurations and intended uses follow:

1.1. Justin Leitgeb's donation: Dell PowerEdge 2850

  • Processor: 2 x 2.8 GHz
  • RAM: 4 GB
  • Disks:
    • 4 x 10K Seagate Cheetah SCSI drives, 73GB and

    • 2 x 10K Seagate Cheetah SCSI drives, 36GB
  • Extra: RAID kit, with battery, etc., 256 MB RAID cache, 2 power supplies

Intended use: fileserver and host for all services that don't involve dynamic content provided by non-admins. No user logins.

1.2. HCoop's currently-underused machine Abulafia

  • Processor: 1 x 900 MHz
  • RAM: 512 MB
  • Disks: 40 GB RAID 1 (2 x 40 GB 7200 RPM ATA drives)
  • Extra: 3Ware 6400 PCI ATA RAID controller

Intended use: refurbished slightly to serve as a generic shell server and the only machine where usage not strictly related to "Internet hosting" is permitted.

1.3. Ray Racine's donation: Sun Fire v20

* Processor: AMD64

  • RAM: ?
  • Disks: 2 x 36 GB Ultra320 SCSI (hot swap)
  • 1U

<!--

Intended use: dynamic web content and any other Internet services that involve running arbitrary code from members (including custom daemons, etc.)

1.4. Switch

We are proceeding under the assumption that we'll use ShaunEmpie's donation (see HardwareDonations), a Nortel (Baystack) 380 switch. He says:

It is not brand new but is working. Here is [http://vpit.net/es380-guide.pdf a guide] that I was able to find to give anyone interested a more in depth view of it.

VLAN Configuration Proposal:

With our new setup, I think it would be best to setup a few different
VLANs for different uses.  For anyone who is unfamiliar with the term, a
VLAN is a virtual lan.  It allows you to have completely separate networks
on the same switch.  This will allow us to setup a private network that
the public and peer1 would have no access to.  This could be handy for
database systems, NAS, backup servers, etc which you'd want to keep off
the public network.

Proposed Configuration:

VLAN 1.     Management VLAN - not used for normal traffic

VLAN 10.    Public VLAN - public/Peer1's network

VLAN 20.    Private VLAN - private subnet for inter-server traffic

For a starting point i think having ports 1-12 in VLAN 10 and ports 13-24
in VLAN 20 would be best.  The VLAN membership of a port can be changed
easily so these would not be set in stone.

The switch allows for many more VLANs than we'll ever need so if anyone
has a suggestion or need for another VLAN it would be trivial to setup.
Any questions/comments, let me know.

-Shaun

ES380 AC Power Specs:

  • Input current: 1.5A to 100 AC
  • Input voltage (rms): 100 to 240 VAC at 47 to 63 Hz
  • Power consumption: 150 W
  • Thermal rating: 1000 BTU/hr maximum

1.5. Serial console

Some device to simulate local login over the Internet could be a life saver. JustinLeitgeb mentions a special card that Dell sells that would work with his donation.

Hardware (last edited 2021-04-17 15:58:03 by ClintonEbadi)