Question: Is there a way to extend a patch bay over fiber?

[JAWS18]

I have a unique situation where I have two patch bays roughly 100M away from each other with multiple systems in each. I need to connect these systems with each other with dedicated lines. Each system has multiple network components and they can not be routed through a single switch with multiple VLANs. Each system must be physically separate as if the patch bay on one rack was a direct network patch to the patch bay on the other rack. The issue I have is that I don't have enough rack to rack patches. What I do have is an 8 core fiber connection between the two racks that's not being used. Are there any components on the market that could take multiple network patches in one rack, convert it to a fiber strand, and then output it back out as multi network patch in the second rack?

[Electronics Wizardy]

Are these current patches rj45? What standard?

 

There are fibre to copper adapters outthere.

 

Normally Id just use a managed switch here. Why can't you use vlans? 

[LAwLz]

I don't really get your setup. 

I assume you by "patch bay" mean an Rj45 patch panel. Correct? 

So where are the other ends of the patch panel? Are the machines right now just hooked into different outlets that goes to an empty patch panel? 

 

39 minutes ago, JAWS18 said:

Are there any components on the market that could take multiple network patches in one rack, convert it to a fiber strand, and then output it back out as multi network patch in the second rack?

Yes, it's called a switch. 

 

 

Why can't you use a managed switch? That would be the obvious solution if you ask me. Otherwise the only solution I can think of is sticking a bunch of Rj45 to fiber converters at each end and then lay one fiber cable for each Rj45 pair. It would be a huge mess. Or if you don't have enough fiber cables and want an even bigger mess, shove a CWDM mux into each end. Switches were made for this. Use them.  

[JAWS18]

In an ideal world a VLAN separated switch would be the easiest solution but the client explicitly wants each system physically separated with no "crossover" in a single switch. 

 

For some more detail on the system there are two network rooms with racks of gear. There are RJ45 cross patches between rooms and an 8 core fiber bundle between the rooms. We've exhausted the RJ45 patches between the two rooms but still have about 40 individual RJ45 connections that need to be made between gear in one room and the corresponding gear in the other room. The client would like the gear connected in each rack to be physical separated from the other systems in the rack. So approximately 5-10 RJ45 cables for each system in their own group.

 

I've never seen anything like it but I was wondering if there were any devices that took a number of RJ45 connections, converted it to a single fiber strand, and then converted it back out as a 1-1 RJ45 on the other end. At this point I'm thinking I'll need to suggest they just install a bunch of switches in each rack for each set of gear. Fiber between each pair of switches and then the gear patch into the switches in each rack. Lots of switches but no VLANs

[Kilrah]

22 minutes ago, JAWS18 said:

I've never seen anything like it but I was wondering if there were any devices that took a number of RJ45 connections, converted it to a single fiber strand, and then converted it back out as a 1-1 RJ45 on the other end.

Well technically it wouldn't be "physically separated" anymore... 

 

22 minutes ago, JAWS18 said:

At this point I'm thinking I'll need to suggest they just install a bunch of switches in each rack for each set of gear. Fiber between each pair of switches and then the gear patch into the switches in each rack.

Yup. Each system that's supposed to be separated gets its own fiber and pair of switches, done. 

 

Optical combiners exist though not sure I've ever seen them in commercial networking, but obviously you need transceiver pairs that are on different wavelengths, the fiber must be able to work on all of those frequencies, and the couplers would cost a few fortunes...

[Blue4130]

4 hours ago, JAWS18 said:

 

I've never seen anything like it but I was wondering if there were any devices that took a number of RJ45 connections, converted it to a single fiber strand, and then converted it back out as a 1-1 RJ45 on the other end.

What you just described is very common in enterprise switches. A number of RJ45 ports, a few sfp or sfp+ up link ports. 

 

 

[LAwLz]

7 hours ago, Blue4130 said:

What you just described is very common in enterprise switches. A number of RJ45 ports, a few sfp or sfp+ up link ports. 

Yeah, but this is the problem:

12 hours ago, JAWS18 said:

the client explicitly wants each system physically separated with no "crossover" in a single switch. 

They have basically said "we want the functionality of a switch, but you're not allowed to use a switch".

 

I think the best thing to do is tell the client that a switch is what you use for these kinds of things. Switch with separate VLANs if they require segmentation of the devices.

The only other option I can think of is, as I said earlier, a bunch of fiber converters and then a CWDM (or DWDM) mux. But it will not be a good solution. 

[Blue4130]

1 hour ago, LAwLz said:

Yeah, but this is the problem:

They have basically said "we want the functionality of a switch, but you're not allowed to use a switch".

 

What does that even mean though? You can't connect two systems without connecting the two systems. I highly think that this is a case of the customer not knowing what they want or how things work. As the I.T. Provider, it's the op's job to explain and educate them on how things work. 

[Kilrah]

7 minutes ago, Blue4130 said:

What does that even mean though? You can't connect two systems without connecting the two systems.

My understanding is they don't want to connect 2 systems. They have systems A, B, C in building 1 and now also systems A, B, C in building 2 and A should connect to A, B to B etc without combining them.

 

But then they run into the usual customer conundrum that "we have hardware, using it requires combining" but "we don't want to combine, and also don't want to change hardware, just find a magical solution".

[Blue4130]

1 minute ago, Kilrah said:

My understanding is they don't want to connect 2 systems. They have systems A, B, C in building 1 and now also systems A, B, C in building 2 and A should connect to A, B to B etc without combining them.

 

But then they run into the usual customer conundrum that "we have hardware, using it requires combining" but "we don't want to combine, and also don't want to change hardware, just find a magical solution".

I get that, this is where the education part comes in. A managed switch is the solution. Vlans were made for situations just like this. Otherwise, get the fish cables ready as some new lines will need to be pulled. 

[jec6613]

I've seen this come up when dealing with systems that must be air gapped.  Generally, the trick is to use the half width switches so you have enough rack U and have one switch per rack dedicated to each segment.  This is usually for segregating classified/unclassified systems, as well as in-band vs out of band, but beyond a certain level they also need independent racks as well to keep segregation.

 

Sounds like the customer needs VLANs, 100%.

[Blue4130]

1 hour ago, jec6613 said:

I've seen this come up when dealing with systems that must be air gapped.  Generally, the trick is to use the half width switches so you have enough rack U and have one switch per rack dedicated to each segment.  This is usually for segregating classified/unclassified systems, as well as in-band vs out of band, but beyond a certain level they also need independent racks as well to keep segregation.

 

Sounds like the customer needs VLANs, 100%.

He says that he is our of rack to rack patches ( I guess he means no more ports or cat wires) and he only has an 8 core fibre line between the two. So at most, he can only hook up 8 systems to it's "pair" in the other rack. So in his case, he could use a fibre breakout box that feeds into 8 individual media converters, but what an inelegant and messy solution in place of a switvh and VLANs.

[jec6613]

11 hours ago, Blue4130 said:

He says that he is our of rack to rack patches ( I guess he means no more ports or cat wires) and he only has an 8 core fibre line between the two. So at most, he can only hook up 8 systems to it's "pair" in the other rack. So in his case, he could use a fibre breakout box that feeds into 8 individual media converters, but what an inelegant and messy solution in place of a switvh and VLANs.

Agreed, that's why half width switches to aggregate the servers into a single fiber pair for rack to rack connectivity if air gapping is a requirement.  If it is a requirement though, then the customer needs to be willing to spend to make it work.

[JAWS18]

Thank you all,

 

This is pretty much exactly what I expected. I was hoping there was some magical device out there I'd never heard of before. LOL.

 

I think my best choice moving forward is individual pairs of fiber switches for each system. System A gets a switch in room one and two connected over fiber. Then System B gets a switch in room one and two connected over fiber and so on. This will give the client the air gap they want and allow for port expansion down the road. Right now I have a total of four different systems. So I should be able to fit those four pairs of switches on the 8 core fiber running between the two rooms.

[mineblaster]

there is this box that houses media converters but you would be limited to 1gbe

 

https://www.tp-link.com/us/business-networking/accessory/tl-mc1400/

 

but switches with sfp / qsfp ports would be a wiser investment