[Nut-upsuser] Why are LAN ports not standard on UPSs these days?

Tim Dawson tadawson at tpcsvc.com
Sun Jun 25 13:24:43 UTC 2017

I'll guess expense, and possibly inherent unreliability in that there is more than a passive interconnect to the server. Having said that, higher end gear appears far more likely to have a LAN port or capability thereof . . . the cheap hope stuff does not, considering that it likely would not see much use. In any case, NUT server mode pretty well negates any need . . . at least in my experience . . .

On June 25, 2017 7:53:08 AM CDT, Philip Rhoades <phil at pricom.com.au> wrote:
>A couple of decades before I was retired and was still working for
>people I had cause to install UPSs and they usually had RS232 ports to 
>allow the setting up of shutdown scripts to UNIX / Linux servers.  Now,
>after not having to be concerned by those issues for some time - most
>my little web sites have been on Digital Ocean or other suppliers VMs 
>for a long time - I am shutting down my DO servers and bringing my
>in-house.  However, now I need to be concerned about reliable power 
>again so I have spent a bit of time looking at options and I don't 
>understand why most of the UPS offerings available do not come standard
>with a LAN port?  Why is this?
>Do people have suggestions about my options?  I have two main machines
>say 250-400W total and a few small devices inc a Billion router and
>USB devices.  It would be nice to have at say 5-10 minutes battery 
>backup before sending shutdown messages to the Linux machines.
>Philip Rhoades
>PO Box 896
>Cowra  NSW  2794
>E-mail:  phil at pricom.com.au
>Nut-upsuser mailing list
>Nut-upsuser at lists.alioth.debian.org

Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/nut-upsuser/attachments/20170625/fdd8afc0/attachment.html>

More information about the Nut-upsuser mailing list