Patch panel order vs switchport order

heath · July 25, 2018, 11:03:39 AM

We're doing a total re-wire of an old facility. It was full of 12-pair Cat3 and abandoned token ring and thicknet. We're relocating the telcom closet to a better location, new racks, new Cat6 cabling, etc.

Over the last couple years, we've pretty much abandoned horizontal cable management in the rack. We've opted instead for 1ft cables and matching a 48 port patch panel with a 48 port switch. The one drawback for me is the port numbering. Patch panels are numbered horizontally - two rows of 24 ports, 1-24 on top, 25-48 on bottom. However, switches (Cisco) are numbered vertically - 24 columns of 2 ports, odd numbers on top, even numbers on the bottom.

During the labeling discussions, I tossed out the idea of going against convention for the patch panel layout and match it to the switch. So that, like the switch, the patch panel would be 24 columns of 2 ports with odd on top and even on the bottom. A perfect 1 to 1 match with the way the switch ports are numbered.

They looked at me like I had just sprouted feathers and a 3rd eye. One guy just shook his head with his eyes closed as if he had just witnessed something disturbing and was trying to erase it from his memory. I eventually gave up because I did realize it was a "radical" idea likely to confuse the cable installers and the thought of this one location being different from everything else was triggering my OCD a little.

But I'm curious if anyone else had thought about or implemented that kind of patch panel arrangement? Was my idea really that terrible?

deanwebb · July 25, 2018, 11:08:19 AM

They pretty much just put up with it and know that the top row of the panel will equal the left half of the switchports. It's been that way for years and years, and it would mess everyone up if you went a different way with that.

wintermute000 · July 25, 2018, 07:07:18 PM

At the end of the day as long as its consistent. logical and correctly labelled, who cares.

icecream-guy · July 26, 2018, 06:13:34 AM

doing the logical port1 switch - to port 1 panel, etc. Tends to create cable mess, cable get wrapped around each other for a nice braided look.
but as winter says. it don't matter,
last place I was at was always direct connect, as patch panels introduce another point of failure in the path
other place have used a ToR design, where there was no need for patch panels, switch at top of rack fed servers in same rack.

heath · July 30, 2018, 09:26:31 AM

I should clarify that I am the network admin that is/will be managing this system. This is a re-wire of a branch campus that, until this past week, was still using a lot of 12-pair Cat3 on 66 blocks.

It seems that matching patch order to switch port order is a mess either way. There's either a wiring mess if patched in order (patch panel 24 to switch 24, patch panel 25 to switch port 25, etc) or a switch configuration mess (patch panel 24 to switch port 47, patch panel 25 to switch port 2, etc).

But why does it have to be that way? Just because it always has? Because it's convention? We just have to put up with it? We have the power to change it, so why not? The numbers printed on the patch panel are meaningless anyway as we label over them, right? Why not label them (and punch in the wiring) to match the switch port layout?

I went along with the convention and chose the switch configuration mess rather than the wiring mess. But the convention sucks.

Before and After pics attached. Previously there were two closets, one on each floor. The second floor closet was so cramped I couldn't even get a good picture. We combined to a single closet in a better location. We had an ordering snafu with the UPS, so running off of wall power for now. Another rack to hold the Symettra, an ISR, and a couple other pieces of equipment is still to go in as well.

deanwebb · July 30, 2018, 11:07:00 AM

I swear I've seen the exact same patch panel and wiring closet stuff in every place I've ever worked.

heath · July 30, 2018, 12:56:24 PM

And that consistency with every other closet is why I gave up on the idea. But I just keep thinking... we can do it better.

Otanx · July 30, 2018, 02:53:25 PM

I don't see why the numbering on the patch panel maters. As you said it is going to get covered up with a label identifying the far end anyway. I don't think I have ever referenced a patch panel port number. We use the distant end as the ID. So on my switch I have a description that says 107.4 for room 107 port 4. Then a label on the patch panel that says 107.4. The label at the office just has the port number of the office (4). I could see wanting to put some kind of ID at the office on where to find the patch panel, but that could be as simple as room rack U of panel. That would get you close enough to find the specific port.

-Otanx

heath · July 30, 2018, 04:48:24 PM

In our scheme, the labeling on the far end jack matches the label at the patch panel and is also the switchport description. Our labeling scheme is the room number and the sequential number in the rack separated by a hyphen (or a dot if the labeling crew messes up). So, sequentially, the first port on the second patch panel (assuming 48-port panels) is 49. If that is in room 107, then the label is 107-49. The room jack, patch panel, and switchport all have that same label. We also don't segment phone and data. It's all Cat5 (or Cat6 now). What is a phone today may be a printer next semester when everybody shuffles offices.