MADMAN wrote: > > Hmmm, IOS imgaes that are approaching, (in some cases > exceeding) 20M ;)
I'm not sure what your point it, other than to be funny :-), but I do have to say that it doesn't matter that it's a 20 MB file when talking about the file travelling across a fraction of an inch within a switch versus the file travelling across say a 10-foot cable. OK, so the first bit would incur maybe an extra 20 nanoseconds of delay. The remaining 160,000,000 bits would be right behind the first one and wouldn't encounter any extra delay. > > Dave > > Larry Letterman wrote: > > where did the other 1/3 of the speed go ? Resistance caused by the cable properties. (It should have said 2/3 the speed of light in a vacuum). Priscilla > > :) > > > > > > 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=62223&t=62166 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
