Wireless Access

Reply
Occasional Contributor I

Can the Aruba 7030 Controller work with 10Gb SFP+?

"Can the Aruba 7030 Controller work with 10Gb SFP?"

 

I ask this question only because I was a bit confused by the marketing datasheet.  I see mentions of the SFP+ accessories toward the bottom of the page for 10Gb access.  However, the Aruba 7030 has "8 (combo)" in the slot column for GBIC/SFP capabilities.  Do any of those combo ports support SFP+ for 10Gb?

Please see: http://www.arubanetworks.com/assets/ds/DS_7000Series.pdf

Aruba

Re: Can the Aruba 7030 Controller work with 10Gb SFP+?

The 7030 only supports 1G SFPs.   The 7024 or any 72xx will support 10G SFP+.

 

 

------------------------------------------------
Systems Engineer, Northeast USA
ACCX | ACDX | ACMX

Occasional Contributor I

Re: Can the Aruba 7030 Controller work with 10Gb SFP+?

Thanks Clembo,

 

Im still confused as to what the "combo" is refering to on the product sheet.  It really dosen't make since if the 7030 (being a step up model) has removed 10Gb options.

New Contributor

Re: Can the Aruba 7030 Controller work with 10Gb SFP+?

Hi,

 

you need to know, that the 7024 was released after the 7030. So the 7024 is a newer model then the 7030.

 

The 7030 has 8x RJ-45 and 8x SFP. One Example:

You are using ethernet 0/0/0 (RJ45), you cant use ethernet 0/0/0 (SFP).

You are using ethernet 0/0/1 (SFP), you cant use ethernet 0/0/1 (RJ45).

 

Summary: There are two physical ports RJ45 and SFP, but both are combined through the software. You can decide if you want to use RJ45 or SFP (comboport).

----------------------------------
ACMA, ACMP, ACCP
Network and IT-Security
Occasional Contributor I

Re: Can the Aruba 7030 Controller work with 10Gb SFP+?

Thanks for the explanation.  I have used the bigger models and understand the sofware switched SFP/RJ45 ports but that marketing is very confusing when it comes to the 7030 model. 

 

http://www.arubanetworks.com/assets/ds/DS_7000Series.pdf

Search Airheads
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: