Looking for: Manageable Gbit ETH switch for 10" rack (8port+SFP, with PoE)

[Yansi]

Hello,

after spending some time on the web, I am kind of thinking I must be searching for unobtanium. What I am looking for is a manageable gigabit ethernet switch, that would fit in a 10" rack. Is this very hard? No.

With 8 ports and at least one gigabit SFP. Is this hard to find? Quite.

With PoE capability on the 8 ports. Is it hard? Unobtanium!

Why 10 inch rack? a) it is a standard size. b) I have a space constrained application, that already utilizes 10" instrumentation, fitted always in pairs into a standard 19" rack. (yes, two 10" sized instruments fit exactly on a 19" shelf - look up the dimensions)

Yet every and each switch I find that woud pass the requirements is for some stupid reason in some random stupid width, that is non standard. Like 10.6", 11", 13", or whatever random number the design team came up with. 10" standard rack instrument should have the case width of about 220mm (8.7"), 10" is measured including the rack ears. See wiki: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:19_inch_vs_10_inch_rack_dimensions.svg
Two 10" instruments can be mounted on a 19" shelf next to each other.

In case you know about a device, that will pass the requirements (10" rack standard size, 8 gig ports + gig SFP and PoE) please please plaese let me know.
Regards,
Yan

[rob77]

TL-SG1016PE , no SFP but you can use a 1gbit fiber converter

edit: didn't notice it's 12''

but this one would fit the bill nicely without breaking the bank

TL-SG2210P

https://www.tp-link.com/ae/business-networking/poe-switch/tl-sg2210p/

small, 8x poe with 61W budget and it has 2x sfp.

[Someone]

With 8 ports and at least one gigabit SFP. Is this hard to find? Quite.

With PoE capability on the 8 ports. Is it hard? Unobtanium!

Cisco have n variations on this, in all sorts of shapes and sizes.

[Yansi]

TL-SG1016PE , no SFP but you can use a 1gbit fiber converter

That option is not what I need. No extra converters allowed.

With 8 ports and at least one gigabit SFP. Is this hard to find? Quite.

With PoE capability on the 8 ports. Is it hard? Unobtanium!

Cisco have n variations on this, in all sorts of shapes and sizes.

Cisco has a lot of stuff. None 10" rack mountable as far as I can see. But I may be wrong - can you suggest a part number to look at please? I may be blind to see the forrest for the trees. I have searched also through all ebay, there are a lot of  devices that are 8+1sfp or 8+2sfp, even with PoE, but always too large to be mountable in a 10" (or as a twin into a 19").

[rob77]

TL-SG1016PE , no SFP but you can use a 1gbit fiber converter

That option is not what I need. No extra converters allowed.

edited my post - added this one:

TL-SG2210P

https://www.tp-link.com/ae/business-networking/poe-switch/tl-sg2210p/

it has everything, but the power budget for the PoE is small becaose of the small form factor. newer version TL-SG2210MP has a 150W budget for 8 ports but it's 12'' wide.

[madires]

HPE JL681A#ABB or LANCOM GS-2310P+ for example.

[Halcyon]

Does it have to be rack mountable? Can it just sit on a shelf inside the rack?

If so, look at the Ubiquiti USW-Enterprise-8-PoE: https://store.ui.com/collections/unifi-network-switching/products/switch-enterprise-8-poe

Has 8x 2.5Gbps PoE+ copper ports plus x2 10Gbps SFP+ ports. The unit itself measures 200 x 248 x 44mm. Comes with a wall mounting kit which could possibly be adapted for mounting at the back or sides of a rack.

[Yansi]

TL-SG1016PE , no SFP but you can use a 1gbit fiber converter

That option is not what I need. No extra converters allowed.

edited my post - added this one:

TL-SG2210P

https://www.tp-link.com/ae/business-networking/poe-switch/tl-sg2210p/

it has everything, but the power budget for the PoE is small becaose of the small form factor. newer version TL-SG2210MP has a 150W budget for 8 ports but it's 12'' wide.

Huh, have missed that one, but probably got filtered out due to the non rack dimensions. But yes, this one could lay on a shelf, definitely. Ports from the back may also be nice to have for some applications. I am taking notes. Thanks!

HPE JL681A#ABB or LANCOM GS-2310P+ for example.

The HPE has again, wrong dimension. 10" wide case is not 10" rack instrument.
But the LANCOM, you have nailed it exactly! That is what I was looking for.  That is a 10" rack instruments and with a huge power budget of 130 W. And also fanless. Amazing. But what is not amazing is the price. This one is an expensive badboy! But also taking notes, will use that one if none better will show up.

Does it have to be rack mountable? Can it just sit on a shelf inside the rack?

If so, look at the Ubiquiti USW-Enterprise-8-PoE: https://store.ui.com/collections/unifi-network-switching/products/switch-enterprise-8-poe

Has 8x 2.5Gbps PoE+ copper ports plus x2 10Gbps SFP+ ports. The unit itself measures 200 x 248 x 44mm. Comes with a wall mounting kit which could possibly be adapted for mounting at the back or sides of a rack.

Looks like a toy, but is no toy.  Unfortunately I do not have use for 2.5Gb or 10Gb SFP, as most of the connected instrumentation will be 100M. I know, good to future proof it, but I am pretty sure I do not need this here. Also not Cheap.

Thank you so far for the two very nice suggestions. I will  list them here for clarity:
TPlink TL-SG2210P
LANCOM GS-2310P+

[Ranayna]

The Aruba InstantOn 1930 8G PoE (what a stupidly long name :p), HPE number JL681A should also fit the bill.
That is 10" wide, and the pictures show mounting holes for brackets, but I was not able to find out if they are included.

Pricewise, that sits smack in the middle between the TP-Link and Lancom.

[madires]

The HPE has again, wrong dimension. 10" wide case is not 10" rack instrument.

Usually you can place a slightly wider device on a shelf behind the front rails, in case it would be an option for you.

[Yansi]

Yes, you can come up wit all sorts of junk mounting, but this will not work, if you need to fit two 10" devices onto a 19" rack - as that is what I am looking for.
The holes provided on the sides JL681A are definitely for rack ears, but for a long ones, that will fit into a 19" rack. So that the small box will occupy whole 19" unit.

When you design mobile equipment, you do want to be as space efficient as possible. I do not like transporting around boxes half filled with air.

[madires]

It was just a suggestion for a less expensive solution. BTW, if you place a device on a shelf you don't need rackmount brackets for the rails. Since you mentioned mobile equipment, there are many nice 10" and 19" mini racks or frames on rolls.

[Yansi]

Sure I do not need the rack ears or brackets there. But I still need the device to conform to an industry standard 10" rack size, otherwise 2 of those will simply not fit in a 19"  rack next to each other. And that is the problem, as the damn switches rarely conform to the 10" rack size standard, are almost always bigger, in some random stupid size. 
I was quite surprised, as in the AV industry, 10" rack instruments are very common, so I thought the telco stuff must conform to the 10" rack standard too - there are heaps of sheet metal wallmount 10" telcom racks, but rarely does anything fit in there it seems.

[madires]

In the world of data centers and carriers everything is 19". 10" is for small offices. So the best way to find 10" devices is to look for professional SOHO stuff. Another tip: based on the depth of your rack and devices you might be able to mount also stuff at the rack's back side (use half shelfes if needed).

[Ranayna]

Yansi, i have to apologise.
In more than 15 years of IT, it never even occured once to me, that in the 19" and 10" Racks, the inner distance of the bars is actually less than that.
I always ever only dealt with standardized 19" hardware and never had to actually measure the width of equipment or racks.

That also explains why i could not find short brackets for that 10" HPE Aruba Switch

[tszaboo]

What I found, in IT it rarely make sense to future proof something, unless you have a specific use case with a specific deadline in mind. Otherwise if you buy equipment 2-3 years later, it is always cheaper to buy it than now. That being sad: Maybe look into Poe inserters. I doubt that you will need PoE on all ports, and switches are not designed with that in mind, except some rare cases, which are specifically made for camera systems and such.

[madires]

PoE is quite popular with VoIP phones or access points.

[Ranayna]

Indeed it is.
Though i think what tszaboo means is, that virtually no switch is able to provide full power to every port that it has. They all have a power budget cap significantly lower than the theoretical maximum.
But that is fine in most cases. It is relatively rare for IT equipment to really draw full power. For example our IP phones require around 6 to 7 watts in standby, with the display turned on, and not really much more while in a call. A lot lower than the ~15 Watts available with 802.3af. Similar with our WiFi 6 Access Points. Those stay below 20 watts, again lower than the ~30 watts of 802.3at.
At least that are the values that our switches show me on the cli, and the switch also uses these actual values for the calculation of power budgets.

[madires]

Yep! But don't forget the start-up power draw of the PoE powered devices! Anyway, there are PoE switches for most use cases. Smaller ones with a few PoE enabled ports, all ports PoE enabled with limited shared power, and also all ports PoE enabled supporting max. possible power.

[tszaboo]

Indeed it is.
Though i think what tszaboo means is, that virtually no switch is able to provide full power to every port that it has. They all have a power budget cap significantly lower than the theoretical maximum.
But that is fine in most cases. It is relatively rare for IT equipment to really draw full power. For example our IP phones require around 6 to 7 watts in standby, with the display turned on, and not really much more while in a call. A lot lower than the ~15 Watts available with 802.3af. Similar with our WiFi 6 Access Points. Those stay below 20 watts, again lower than the ~30 watts of 802.3at.
At least that are the values that our switches show me on the cli, and the switch also uses these actual values for the calculation of power budgets.

True. PoE standard can be anywhere from 0W to ~75W as I recall per port. So a 16 port switch would need to have 1KW power supply built in. Plus the magnetics is more expensive for PoE because it can go into DC saturation. And normal PoE is a smart protocol, you need an adjustable DC-DC per port. All of these cost money.

[Yansi]

Indeed it is.
Though i think what tszaboo means is, that virtually no switch is able to provide full power to every port that it has. They all have a power budget cap significantly lower than the theoretical maximum.
But that is fine in most cases. It is relatively rare for IT equipment to really draw full power. For example our IP phones require around 6 to 7 watts in standby, with the display turned on, and not really much more while in a call. A lot lower than the ~15 Watts available with 802.3af. Similar with our WiFi 6 Access Points. Those stay below 20 watts, again lower than the ~30 watts of 802.3at.
At least that are the values that our switches show me on the cli, and the switch also uses these actual values for the calculation of power budgets.

True. PoE standard can be anywhere from 0W to ~75W as I recall per port. So a 16 port switch would need to have 1KW power supply built in. Plus the magnetics is more expensive for PoE because it can go into DC saturation. And normal PoE is a smart protocol, you need an adjustable DC-DC per port. All of these cost money.

Nobody forces you to support 75W a port.  Heck nobody even forces you to be able to supply all ports at once at full power. Most of the cheaper PoE switches support 802.3at on all ports, but will not deliver that much power on all ports at once, as the power budget is quite smaller.

And as far as I know you do not need any adjustable DC/DC per port. At least not for 802.3af or 802.3at I am a bit familiar with. On the source side, there is just a mosfet to switch it on or off and some other smarts (metering, protection and device identification), that can fit easily multiple channels within a single small TSSOP/QFN IC.
The (isolated) DC/DC is on the powered device side, where you need to provide the galvanic isolation. I do not think that many (if any) PoE switches provide galvanically isolated DC output in between ports (power source side). The power is running simply -48 to some -53V against a common ground - so the ports on the source equipment are not galvanically isolated in between each other, they run with a common ground of the PoE supply.

Please correct me if I am wrong, I have only studied the 802.3af/at only so far, never done any actual designs with it yet so I may have missed some requirements.

[mansaxel]

The Lancom says "Orchestrated from the LANCOM Management Cloud, it is configured efficiently and automatically by SD-LAN." which means that it never truly is yours. You never know if the switch is going to be a brick tomorrow from planned obsolescence because Vendor wants to "refocus" or wants you to buy a new model.

Since you already HAVE a 19" rack, buy a 19" switch and be done with it.

Fully agree with the notion that this is something that should be easy to swap out, because in 3 years the world will have moved on, and placing the restraint 'must be 10"' on a COTS item is going to be cumbersome, as you've already discovered.

[ve7xen]

Indeed it is.
Though i think what tszaboo means is, that virtually no switch is able to provide full power to every port that it has. They all have a power budget cap significantly lower than the theoretical maximum.
But that is fine in most cases. It is relatively rare for IT equipment to really draw full power. For example our IP phones require around 6 to 7 watts in standby, with the display turned on, and not really much more while in a call. A lot lower than the ~15 Watts available with 802.3af. Similar with our WiFi 6 Access Points. Those stay below 20 watts, again lower than the ~30 watts of 802.3at.
At least that are the values that our switches show me on the cli, and the switch also uses these actual values for the calculation of power budgets.

Just be careful, because the allocated power is (should) be calculated based on the advertised power requirement of the PD, not its actual consumption, for obvious reasons (it needs to avoid being overloaded if usage increases, which is a bad situation that would require cutting power from an active PD). It's pretty easy to allocate more than the available budget while consumption remains considerably lower, and the switch will (should) reject additional allocation requests from PDs in this situation.

Looks like a toy, but is no toy.  Unfortunately I do not have use for 2.5Gb or 10Gb SFP, as most of the connected instrumentation will be 100M. I know, good to future proof it, but I am pretty sure I do not need this here. Also not Cheap.

You may not need it, but many active/non-obsolete devices in this segment are going to have 10G uplinks, it's the modern expectation. Such devices may still suit your purposes.

I think mikrotik CRS112-8P-4S-IN (with the optional 48V power supply) may suit your requirements.

[Yansi]

Yes, sure, I have a 19" rack. But that has some  limited number of Us,  where I need to fit my stuff.

And if manufacturers were not morons and would conform to the 10" standard, no problems like this would exist. There is a metric sh!t ton of "less than 19 yet rack mountable" devices, but none conform to the 10" standard, even though the boxes are almost full of air and could be easily designed to fit within 10" enclosure.

Yes, I am crying on a wrong grave here... but... I just like to share my sheer disappointment with finding a 10" switch to be that difficult.

And BTW,  I have already bought the TPlink TL-SG2210P, and already received it. And I am very satisfied. So  kudos to rob77 for sending a tip for this one. Two more pieces already on the way home.

The build quality inside seems very decent. PCB layout looks very nice. Attaching few photos to please an eye or two. The web interface is very nicely layed out, easy to navigate and responsive.