On Thu, Jun 09, 2011 at 11:33:04AM -0700, Gary Kline wrote: > On Wed, Jun 08, 2011 at 11:34:30PM -0600, Chad Perrin wrote: > > > > . . . but Cisco switches are overpriced crap. We were disconnecting the > > Netgear to replace it with a Cisco that offered a lot more functionality, > > and administration turned out to be a fucking nightmare with that thing. > > It's like replacing Postfix with MS Exchange because you want integrated > > calendaring and all the other crap in the BusinessWeek full-page ad, then > > finding out that you basically need a full-time employee just to manage > > that one server. > > LOL, man. But then, your troubles were at work, right? I mean > somewhere that has dozens or more people, users/computers going > thru the switch [?] Years ago I had as many a 6 > computers--including my daughter's ancient W2K on a Kayak and > wife's work laptop and my several tower and laptops going thru > the 16-porter. *Still*, I don't care, the daamn thing should > have lasted longer than it did.
Actually, that was when I was the first and only paid employee of the Wikimedia Foundation. Everybody else was Jimmy Wales, his assistant at Bomis, and volunteers who "worked" with us remotely -- plus the whole Internet using Wikipedia. So, yeah . . . "dozens of people" sending traffic through the switch is a gross understatement. The switches I mentioned that I've had die off one port at a time, though, were not at the Wikimedia Foundation. They were my personal kit for my home networks over the years and, in one case, the main switch at a small consultancy where I was the Unix guru. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]
pgp0cIB5wRAVo.pgp
Description: PGP signature