I just saw your message!? You are right-on with the STP comments, which I snipped, but this other thing caught my eye.
At 11:08 AM 5/18/02, Leigh Anne Chisholm wrote: >PS. Priscilla - if a network is supposed to be designed at the access layer >first, then distribution layer, then the core, why is your book called >"Top-Down Network Design"? Shouldn't it be "Bottom's Up"? I know I >personally prefer the latter... (-: I guess you must be looking at a typical picture of Cisco's hierarchical model that has the core at the top. Just turn it upside down. There's nothing that says the core has to be displayed at the top. (My favorite pictures show the model as concentric circles actually.) Top-Down Network Design doesn't actually say that access should be designed first, but I guess if I were to think about it, I would say that's usually true. How can you know what you'll need in the core if you haven't figured out the edges first? But it's definitely an iterative process too, as I say in the first few pages of the book. It probably sounds like I don't have much of a sense of humor about this. I do really! ;-) Priscilla ________________________ Priscilla Oppenheimer http://www.priscilla.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44550&t=44408 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
