Honestly, what kind of applications are you running on the network? How
much traffic do you expect, and what kinds of traffic patterns (i.e. all
users using high-bandwidth network aps at once vs. 5 minutes use, then
half-hour not computing, etc.).
I recently installed a 10/100 switching infrastructure with 111 out of 192
ports in use; 5 servers, 8 printers. My observations are that 100-Meg
switched is almost overkill. Plenty of headroom. And you're thinking of
gigabit? Lot of dollars without knowing beforehand that you need it.
But again, the last word belongs to Lorenzo, in a previous post--you need
to do at least some preliminary homework to determine your needs--gather
some specifics. 100-Meg switches alone may not be enough for your
network. Of course, how they're tied together is equally important.
FWIW, my solution was to use 8 24-port switches. 3 floors in the
building, so a stack of 3, 2, and 3 (stack meaning that 3 or 2 switches
are tied together using high-speed proprietary cables--generally >
gigabit), so on each floor you have a "virtual switch" of 72, 48, and 72
ports respectively. And these stacks were tied together with dual 100-MB
Full Duplex "port trunks"--a feature you'll generally find on switches,
whereby you can connect switches or stacks of them together using not one,
but up to four cables, and do load-sharing instead of having spanning-tree
kill off the redundant connections.
Shawn T. Carroll
Network Support Specialist
Alltel Information Services
Williston, VT
802 872 2933
--
On Tue, 5 Sep 2000, Ole Drews Jensen wrote:
>Thanks,
>
>If I have the servers attached to 100 Mbps ports, wouldn't that create many
>collisions when a lot of workstations attached to 100 Mbps ports try to
>access data at the same time?
>
>That was the reason why I was thinking about Gbps solutions for the servers.
>
>Thanks for your comment on this,
>
>Ole
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Ole Drews Jensen
> Systems Network Manager
> CCNA, MCSE, MCP+I
> RWR Enterprises, Inc.
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: E A Moran [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2000 12:40 PM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: Switch Design
>
>
>Using Catalyst switches will reduce collisions. Remember that switches
>create their own collision domains per port. I would recommend using two
>Cat3548's and you can stack them with GBICs or add them to the Gigabit
>backbone. You will spend less money and have fewer devices to maintain.
>Unles you have a reason to want more switches.
>
>"Ole Drews Jensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>2019FB428FD3D311893700508B71EBFB2C5B2A@RWR_MAIL_SVR">news:2019FB428FD3D311893700508B71EBFB2C5B2A@RWR_MAIL_SVR...
>> I know that I can find all the information about switches on the Cisco
>site,
>> but I would like some feedback and advise from experienced Cisco Switch
>> users.
>>
>> I have a "small" LAN where the total amount of connections are below 100.
>> Seven of the connections are servers.
>>
>> Since I am redesigning the hardware, I would like to know what you think
>> would be the best solution.
>>
>> I would like to give everyone Fast Ethernet access, so I though about
>> putting four 3524's together on a Gigabit backbone, but would that cause
>to
>> many collisions with my servers on Fast Ethernet too?
>>
>> I could also get a 12 port Gigabit switch that connects my servers and
>four
>> 3524's so I have a Gigabit backbone with less collisions on my servers,
>but
>> I do not know how well Gigabit NIC's work with NT 4.0 and Novell 4.0.
>>
>> If any of you have comments to this, or any other recommendations, I would
>> appreciate a reply.
>>
>> I have started my BCMSN studying, but so far it has been concentrating on
>> big networks with the three Cisco layers. As far as the layers go, I
>believe
>> my LAN stays in the Access layer.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Ole
>>
>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>> Ole Drews Jensen
>> Systems Network Manager
>> CCNA, MCSE, MCP+I
>> RWR Enterprises, Inc.
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>
>>
>> ___________________________________
>> UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html
>> FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com
>> Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>
>
>___________________________________
>UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html
>FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com
>Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>___________________________________
>UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html
>FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com
>Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Shawn T. Carroll
Network Support Specialist
Alltel Information Services
Williston, VT
802 872 2933
--
**NOTE: New CCNA/CCDA List has been formed. For more information go to
http://www.groupstudy.com/list/Associate-Announcement.html
_________________________________
UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
