obviously you've never worked in a brokerage firm.... ;-> my point being that you can get away with a lot, up to a certain point. When that point is reached, you can throw hardware and/or bandwidth at the thing, and buy some more time. Maybe a lot of time. Or you start over, and do things right, from the start.
I would suggest that there are special cases even in the most well designed and planned networks, where there are islands of chaos. I agree that there is nothing like having whomever tell you what the solution is, rather than tell you the problem. We need a T1. We need a P5 machine. We need more RAM. Whatever. Working for whom I work for these days, the answer is always "yes, sir. Sign right here" ;-> ""Steve Watson"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > I was speaking in general terms. While it is conceivable to build a > network without customer requirements and (to a degree) it will be > functional, the network has no room for growth and more than likely will > be hard to manage. The buzzwords scalability and efficiency come to > mind. > > The best place to start (correction the ONLY place to start) is to > define the customer's requirements (now and for the 18 - 24 months) so > you design and implement a viable solution that has room to grow. > > I have done, in the past, what you have mentioned below and were met > with the same frustration you were (inefficiency and network loading > problems). That's why I tell my customers; don't tell me you need a T-1 > (nowadays everybody wants a DS3) tell me what will ride this circuit and > we will do an analysis of bandwidth to determine what is best... yada.. > yada.. yada.. > > Steve > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of > Chuck > Sent: Sunday, May 19, 2002 12:22 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Network Design... Hmmm [7:44417] > > ""Steve Watson"" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > This was not a comparison of network design methodologies, it was mean > > to be humorous (I totally agree with the top down process). The idea > of > > "build a network and they will come" simply does not work! > > > CL: au contraire, mon ami! I give you the small brokerage firm I used to > work for. Filled with unsophisticated users. When I arrived there was no > WAN > and no LAN to speak of - the so called LAN was dictated by the quote > service > vendor. > > I put in a real LAN with e-mail. That took off like crazy. > > I put in a real WAN with the branches able to send e-mail to eachother, > and > that took off even crazier. > > I put in an internet connection, and sure there was the usual crap with > people checking out the adult entertainment, but you know, I had guys > who > could prior to my arrival couldn't tun their computers on going out and > finding some realy nice investment sites and services that helped them > tremendously in their business. > > At the time of my leaving, the LAN./WAM was starting to show signs of > stress. In the course of my cetification pursuit, I have learned all the > things I did wrong. But I gotta say, you have to start someplace, and it > remains true that if the facilities exist, the user community will find > a > lot of ways to use those facilities. > > > > > > > > The context of the other book was that no network will function > properly > > if Layer 1 is not designed correctly. > > > > BTW, how many is too many? :-) > > > > Steve > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf > Of > > Priscilla Oppenheimer > > Sent: Saturday, May 18, 2002 2:04 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: Network Design... Hmmm [7:44417] > > > > At 08:49 PM 5/17/02, Steve Watson wrote: > > >I am reading Priscilla's book "Top Down Network Design" for the > second > > >time for a refresher and decided to hit the pool after I got home. > > > > Thanks for reading Top-Down Network Design. I hope you had a nice swim > > and > > didn't drink too many beers at the pool. ;-) > > > > >On > > >the way out I looked on my book shelf and saw "Advanced IP Network > > >Design" that I haven't had a chance to look at yet. So I took it to > the > > >pool with me. When lo and behold, what did I read on page 5, "The > best > > >place to start when designing a network is at the bottom". > > > > Out of context, this is completely meaningless. What else does it say? > > > > > > > > > > >Food for thought :-) > > > > > > > > > > > >Steve > > ________________________ > > > > Priscilla Oppenheimer > > http://www.priscilla.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44486&t=44417 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
