Recommendation for 16+ Port KVM Switch
Bookmark this page:
 Yahoo!
 Google
 Windows Live
 del.icio.us
 digg
 Netscape
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
Posted by Will on July 31, 2006, 6:24 pm
Please log in for more thread options into multiple Belkin eight-port KVM switches, and life was good (or at least tolerable). The customizable menu with names on it would periodically reset itself and lose all values, but at least we could switch from machine to machine. We have "upgraded" to the latest Belkin 16 port model, and it has been pure hell. The device is constantly having problem with keyboard or mouse (sometimes both) on at least 20% of the connected machines. We have tried new cables, and it doesn't seem to make any difference. Belkin replaced the switch, and the problem gets worse. I'm looking for recommendations for a new vendor, possibly a new architecture, for a large scale KVM solution for a server room. My basic requirements are as follows: 1) Up to 32 computers, each of these controllable from two to four stations. 2) Any station can control any computer. 3) We should be able to run long distance, at least 100 feet, from the keyboard, mouse, and monitor to the actual server. 4) Should allow us to identify easily each machine using a name we can assign to it and then read off the KVM switch on screen menu. 5) Should be incredibly *reliable*. Perhaps a better solution would be one that puts the port selector right at the keyboard and mouse and monitor, then runs a multiplexed KVM signal over RJ-45 to a back end device that then attaches to each server. I'm open to any and all ideas on how to best accomplish the mission here. -- Will | |||||||||||||
|
Posted by Paul on July 31, 2006, 10:48 pm
Please log in for more thread options There is a box here (KM0432) that handles 32 computers, with four stations connecting to the 32 computers. A converter box is connected locally to each computer, and the backhaul can be up to 150 meters (at 1024x768 res). http://www.aten.com/products/productList_altusen.php?pcid=2006041110563001&psid=20060411131626002&layerid=subClass1 The KA9120 is an example of a PC compatible converter for the KVM. http://www.aten.com/products/productItem.php?pcid=2006041110563001&psid=20060414154710002&pid=20060414155726007 And judging by the hits in a search engine, there are other similar ones. http://www.altavista.com/web/results?q=32+port+kvm $6000-$7000 ought to handle it, depending on how greedy the supply chain is. Maybe you could arrange to get an eval unit, for some testing. Otherwise, I doubt you'll get a lot of feedback on a big ticket item like this. Paul | |||||||||||||
|
Posted by Will on July 31, 2006, 11:48 pm
Please log in for more thread options > There is a box here (KM0432) that handles 32 computers, with four
http://www.aten.com/products/productList_altusen.php?pcid=2006041110563001&psid=20060411131626002&layerid=subClass1 > stations connecting to the 32 computers. A converter box is connected > locally to each computer, and the backhaul can be up to 150 meters > (at 1024x768 res). > > >
http://www.aten.com/products/productItem.php?pcid=2006041110563001&psid=20060414154710002&pid=20060414155726007 > The KA9120 is an example of a PC compatible converter for the KVM. > > >
> And judging by the hits in a search engine, there are other similar ones. > > http://www.altavista.com/web/results?q=32+port+kvm > > $6000-$7000 ought to handle it, depending on how greedy the supply > chain is. At $6000, ATEN is about 1000% more expensive than what I have seen similar solutions go for. Seems like a lot more than what we would need to spend. The KA9120 in an intriguing idea. If I'm understanding this correctly, the KA9120 presents a DB15 video, and a PS/2 mouse and keyboard, at either end, joined in the middle by RJ-45? Do they have an active amplifier of some kind in this box to travel the 150M? What distance can they carry 1600x1200, which is our standard for some of the servers we need to control? -- Will | |||||||||||||
|
Posted by Paul on August 1, 2006, 6:48 am
Please log in for more thread options
>
> At $6000, ATEN is about 1000% more expensive than what I have seen similar > solutions go for. Seems like a lot more than what we would need to spend. > > The KA9120 in an intriguing idea. If I'm understanding this correctly, > the KA9120 presents a DB15 video, and a PS/2 mouse and keyboard, at either > end, joined in the middle by RJ-45? Do they have an active amplifier of > some kind in this box to travel the 150M? What distance can they carry > 1600x1200, which is our standard for some of the servers we need to control? The KA9120 is ~$100 per unit, and if you used 32 of them, that is $3200. So it is not a cheap option. It converts the connectors at the computer end, into an RJ-45 based signal. The "Matrix KVM" at the other end, has RJ-45 connectors ready to receive those signals. So the KA9120 is not a generic remoting solution, it is a specific extension for their switch. The fact that there are different flavors of KA9120-type devices, allows connecting computers other than PCs. If you wanted a generic remoting solution, I'm sure there are some out there. As for resolution, there is no table of distance versus resolution, but is says 1920x1440 at short distance. So 1600x1200 is possible, but not with the full 150M cable limit. Basically, that tells you the method is analog, with some bandwidth versus distance relationship. If you find an extender with fiber optic interface on it, that can go longer than 150M, but with a much higher price. The Aten is simply the first hit from the search engine I looked at. There looks to be plenty of "copy-cat" action, so perhaps you'll find something with a more reasonable price. But since the unit is 32 ports, with flexible 4 stations at the other end, this is a unit intended for big corporate users, with big corporate budgets. You've got to expect some gouging, if you play in a market like that. They won't be selling a million of these a year, and the staff gotta eat :-) Paul | |||||||||||||
|
Posted by Will on July 31, 2006, 11:49 pm
Please log in for more thread options An additional requirement I forgot to add:
6) We need 1600x1200 resolution for some of the servers. -- Will > Once upon a time, we had all of our rackmounted server room computers
hooked
> into multiple Belkin eight-port KVM switches, and life was good (or at
least
> tolerable). The customizable menu with names on it would periodically
machine
> reset itself and lose all values, but at least we could switch from > to machine. We have "upgraded" to the latest Belkin 16 port model, and
stations.
> it has been pure hell. The device is constantly having problem with > keyboard or mouse (sometimes both) on at least 20% of the connected > machines. We have tried new cables, and it doesn't seem to make any > difference. Belkin replaced the switch, and the problem gets worse. I'm > looking for recommendations for a new vendor, possibly a new architecture, > for a large scale KVM solution for a server room. > > My basic requirements are as follows: > > 1) Up to 32 computers, each of these controllable from two to four >
at
> 2) Any station can control any computer. > > 3) We should be able to run long distance, at least 100 feet, from the > keyboard, mouse, and monitor to the actual server. > > 4) Should allow us to identify easily each machine using a name we can > assign to it and then read off the KVM switch on screen menu. > > 5) Should be incredibly *reliable*. > > Perhaps a better solution would be one that puts the port selector right > the keyboard and mouse and monitor, then runs a multiplexed KVM signal
over
> RJ-45 to a back end device that then attaches to each server. I'm open
to
> any and all ideas on how to best accomplish the mission here.
> > -- > Will > > | |||||||||||||
| Similar Threads | Posted |
| Recommendation for 16+ Port KVM Switch | July 31, 2006, 6:24 pm |
| 8 port gigabit switch recommendation? | February 22, 2008, 1:59 am |
| HELP! Need recommendation: 8-port VKM switch w/perfect video | February 17, 2006, 2:20 pm |
| 4 Port RS232 PCI Card recommendation | July 3, 2008, 2:03 pm |
| Quiet 24-port gigabit switch? | June 5, 2007, 12:33 pm |
| Belkin F1DS104U 4 Port OmniView SOHO USB KVM Switch??? | April 14, 2008, 9:19 am |
| Importance of gigabit switch port buffer size question | June 15, 2005, 10:59 am |
| FA (USA): Belkin OmniView 4-Port KVM + 2-Port KVM + cables + MORE (ends 4/14/08) | April 8, 2008, 1:27 pm |
| Single Port SCSI Card vs Dual Port SCSI Card | July 31, 2005, 7:34 pm |
| KVM recommendation | December 16, 2005, 7:24 am |
| Motherboard Recommendation | July 14, 2005, 6:15 am |
| fx-55 cooler recommendation | September 28, 2005, 3:13 am |
| Recommendation for quiet pc (UK) | March 9, 2006, 6:34 am |
| TV Card Recommendation | April 26, 2006, 8:35 pm |
| Quiet cpu fan recommendation? | June 12, 2006, 6:20 am |
> into multiple Belkin eight-port KVM switches, and life was good (or at least
> tolerable). The customizable menu with names on it would periodically
> reset itself and lose all values, but at least we could switch from machine
> to machine. We have "upgraded" to the latest Belkin 16 port model, and
> it has been pure hell. The device is constantly having problem with
> keyboard or mouse (sometimes both) on at least 20% of the connected
> machines. We have tried new cables, and it doesn't seem to make any
> difference. Belkin replaced the switch, and the problem gets worse. I'm
> looking for recommendations for a new vendor, possibly a new architecture,
> for a large scale KVM solution for a server room.
>
> My basic requirements are as follows:
>
> 1) Up to 32 computers, each of these controllable from two to four stations.
>
> 2) Any station can control any computer.
>
> 3) We should be able to run long distance, at least 100 feet, from the
> keyboard, mouse, and monitor to the actual server.
>
> 4) Should allow us to identify easily each machine using a name we can
> assign to it and then read off the KVM switch on screen menu.
>
> 5) Should be incredibly *reliable*.
>
> Perhaps a better solution would be one that puts the port selector right at
> the keyboard and mouse and monitor, then runs a multiplexed KVM signal over
> RJ-45 to a back end device that then attaches to each server. I'm open to
> any and all ideas on how to best accomplish the mission here.