On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 13:47:12 +1200 Robert Fisher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Friday 15 June 2007 1:14 pm, David Kirk wrote: > > > Robert's point about only being able to daisy chain up to 2 switches > > is incorrect. > > No I said 3 (three) but I cannot find documentation to back up what I had > thought. > > > Our network has at least 10 switches all linked > > together with redundant links. > > I think the following is OK.......... > > P S----------------------------Switch2--------------------Switch3 > R W---------------------------Switch4--------------------Switch5 > I I----------------------------Switch6--------------------Switch7 > M T---------------------------Switch8--------------------Switch9 > A C---------------------------Switch10------------------Switch11 > R H---------------------------Switch12------------------Switch13 > Y > > but not............ > > S-------Sw2------Sw3-----Sw5----Sw6------Sw7----Sw8------Sw9-----Sw10 > W-----------Switch4 > I > T > C > H > > Happy to be corrected though as it could make life easier at times. > Where is Michael Moffat? (He works at Allied Tellyson) > > Rob > I think you're confusing best practices with actually supported. Obviously the available bandwidth plummets with each switch, but networking limits revolve around cable, not equipment ( eg max cat 5 run = 100m - but you can run 200m if there's a switch in the middle, etc ) to the best of my knowledge. Steve Steve