""MADMAN"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Hmmm, IOS imgaes that are approaching, (in some cases exceeding) 20M ;)
speaking of which, how big would the same IOS image be without Banyan, DecNet, Apollo, and all the other obsolete garbage that contaminates them now? > > Dave > > Larry Letterman wrote: > > where did the other 1/3 of the speed go ? > > :) > > > > > > Larry Letterman > > Network Engineer > > Cisco Systems > > > > > > > >>The router is probably in the same rack as the switch. The > > > > cable is probaby > > > >>very short. The fact that electrons have to travel across > > > > it is not a > > > >>consideration. They travel at about 2/3 the speed of > > > > light. > > > >>Priscilla > >> > >>The Long and Winding Road wrote: > >> > >>> wrote in message > >>>[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > >>> > >>>>Dear All, > >>>> > >>>>Need your advice on the following scenario: > >>>> > >>>>I am using VLANs to provide the partitons for the > >>> > > traffic > > > >>>(voice and data) > >>> > >>>>from various departments. In order to provide routing > >>> > > between > > > >>>various > >>> > >>>>VLANs, I would need a router to do so. > >>>> > >>>>Please advice if there are any difference in the > >>> > >>>functionalities etc. if I > >>> > >>>>use > >>>> > >>>>1) a L3 switch for routing between VLANs, > >>>>2) a L2 switch followed by a router for routing > >>> > > between VLANs. > > > >>>1) define "functionality" > >>> > >>>2) define "difference" > >>> > >>>in either case, the net result is the same. for > >> > > inter-vlan > > > >>>forwarding on the > >>>same box, the integrated L3 switch will be faster > >> > > because a) > > > >>>electrons don't > >>>have to travel as far and b) the stripping and rewriting > >> > > of L2 > > > >>>headers can > >>>be more efficiently done ( if it is necessary at all ) > >> > > on the > > > >>>integrated L3 > >>>switch. > >>> > >>>once in a while this group has entertained the > >> > > discussion of > > > >>>the relative > >>>merits of L3 switches versus routers. it occurs to me > >> > > that at > > > >>>the electron > >>>level integrated L3 switching is indeed superior to > >> > > routing, or > > > >>>at least > >>>inter-vlan routing versus router on a stick. Howard - > >> > > care to > > > >>>offer your > >>>insight here? I'm talking about things as they happen at > >> > > the EE > > > >>>level. > >>>Router on a stick has to be "slower" and "less > >> > > efficient" than > > > >>>integrated L3 > >>>for inter-vlan routing. OTOH, I don't see any advantage > >> > > for an > > > >>>integrated L3 > >>>switch acting solely as a router, forwarding traffic > >> > > from > > > >>>itself to another > >>>router down the wire, all other things being equal. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>>Thanks in advance! > >>>> > >>>>Maurice > >>> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- > David Madland > CCIE# 2016 > Sr. Network Engineer > Qwest Communications > 612-664-3367 > > "You don't make the poor richer by making the rich poorer." --Winston > Churchill Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=62210&t=62166 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
