is 10baseT dead? [7:65077]
I don't know why I started to think about this topic over the weekend, but I got to thinking about network design using 10baseT ethernet. I'm a network engineer and work closely with sales. everytime in the past two years we've gone into a project, sales has always used upgrading to 100baseTX as a huge selling point. I can understand this, since the salemen and the customers can readily see 100 as being better than 10, but honestly IMO more than half the users have no reason to upgrade to 100base. plus considering that on many of these projects they don't use anything greater than 100base from the switches to the main server block, so therefore with all the desktops running 100base and browsing the internet, they are technically oversubscribed. what I'm wondering is, how should I say to the salemen that this isn't right, to keep them at 10base for the casual users and only the power users get 100base? I just don't have enough to really take away their best selling point. anyone work in a large company where its implemented like this or is everyone putting the average users desktop to 100base and oversubscribing the uplinks? scott Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=65077&t=65077 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: is 10baseT dead? [7:65077]
A lot of switches these days have gig ports, and most servers ship with gig cards, so where it used to be 10 at the desktop and 100 at the server, it is moving to 100 at the desk and gig at the server (or at least, etherchannel 4 nic's for high load servers). I agree with you in some respects. For instance, a customer of mine recently upgraded their Internet connectivity, put a firewall in and a few other bits and pieces. They have a mix of 3500 and 2550's internally, I suggested a 2950 for the DMZ and a 1912 for the External, as the Internet connection is under a meg, so there is no point buying 100Mb. This gave 100MB from the dmz to Internal, and from the firewall to the external switch. However, for users desktops, if a company is going through the process of upgrading their LAN, it is probably just not worth keeping 10Bt, for the problems it "may" cause in the future, should the company start using high bandwidth applications. My 2 p Symon -Original Message- From: Scott Roberts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 11 March 2003 18:36 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: is 10baseT dead? [7:65077] I don't know why I started to think about this topic over the weekend, but I got to thinking about network design using 10baseT ethernet. I'm a network engineer and work closely with sales. everytime in the past two years we've gone into a project, sales has always used upgrading to 100baseTX as a huge selling point. I can understand this, since the salemen and the customers can readily see 100 as being better than 10, but honestly IMO more than half the users have no reason to upgrade to 100base. plus considering that on many of these projects they don't use anything greater than 100base from the switches to the main server block, so therefore with all the desktops running 100base and browsing the internet, they are technically oversubscribed. what I'm wondering is, how should I say to the salemen that this isn't right, to keep them at 10base for the casual users and only the power users get 100base? I just don't have enough to really take away their best selling point. anyone work in a large company where its implemented like this or is everyone putting the average users desktop to 100base and oversubscribing the uplinks? scott = This email has been content filtered and subject to spam filtering. If you consider this email is unsolicited please forward the email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and request that the sender's domain be blocked from sending any further emails. = ## This e-mail message is privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient please delete the message and notify the sender. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author. This email has been virus and content scanned by the Webvein Mail Gateway. ## Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=65092&t=65077 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: is 10baseT dead? [7:65077]
You're correct that many users don't need 100Mbit to fully function. However, I think you need to look at things from a different perspective: The current cost of 100Mbit is in many cases the same as 10Mbit, and in some cases is even cheaper due to production demand. The cost of 1Gbit is rapidly dropping. We don't know what technologies the future will bring, and we don't know that there won't be a paradigm shift with respect to enterprise applications and/or WAN / Internet access speeds in the near future. Since the future is unknown, and the cost of 100Mbit is not what it used to be, I see no reason to stick with, or sell, 10Mbit. If you don't like the above reason, look at it another way: 10 is faster than 100, customers like faster, customers buy what they like, you have a job to implement what customer buys. At 06:35 PM 3/11/2003 +, you wrote: >I don't know why I started to think about this topic over the weekend, but I >got to thinking about network design using 10baseT ethernet. > >I'm a network engineer and work closely with sales. everytime in the past >two years we've gone into a project, sales has always used upgrading to >100baseTX as a huge selling point. I can understand this, since the salemen >and the customers can readily see 100 as being better than 10, but honestly >IMO more than half the users have no reason to upgrade to 100base. plus >considering that on many of these projects they don't use anything greater >than 100base from the switches to the main server block, so therefore with >all the desktops running 100base and browsing the internet, they are >technically oversubscribed. > >what I'm wondering is, how should I say to the salemen that this isn't >right, to keep them at 10base for the casual users and only the power users >get 100base? I just don't have enough to really take away their best selling >point. > >anyone work in a large company where its implemented like this or is >everyone putting the average users desktop to 100base and oversubscribing >the uplinks? > >scott Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=65099&t=65077 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: is 10baseT dead? [7:65077]
Scott, I think you have a great point, it seems that most of the computer technologies we have today are not taken full advantage of. However instead of taking the air out the sale's staff sales as it were ( no pun intended ). Why not suggest upgrade from the Idf's to the server farm. You could suggest Ether Channel to combine some of the runs you have put in ( I'm sure ) when you are upgrading your networks. This way you have more bandwidth to the server farm and fault tolerance. WOW now that's a selling point. Also it can be done with out raising up the costs on hardware to much. You can get duel interface NIC's for your servers that are fairly reasonable now. I am amazed at the push for processor speed now, I can think if very few people that NEED 3Ghz with 2Gb of RAM. However no one NEEDS a Jaguar eigther, some people just want it and if they can afford it so be it. Look at the situation this way at least if your going for over kill the network will perform well, that is better than underselling and then having your clients be upset because they are limited in the future. But hay that's just my 2 cents. Take it with a grain of salt. = ) Steven Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=65181&t=65077 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: is 10baseT dead? [7:65077]
What about htis. The server tries to dump data to the client over the 10M pipe. The client cannot accept it as fast as the server can put out. Having a slower line to the client in effect will cause degradation at the server. -Original Message- From: Steven Aiello [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 11:02 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: is 10baseT dead? [7:65077] Scott, I think you have a great point, it seems that most of the computer technologies we have today are not taken full advantage of. However instead of taking the air out the sale's staff sales as it were ( no pun intended ). Why not suggest upgrade from the Idf's to the server farm. You could suggest Ether Channel to combine some of the runs you have put in ( I'm sure ) when you are upgrading your networks. This way you have more bandwidth to the server farm and fault tolerance. WOW now that's a selling point. Also it can be done with out raising up the costs on hardware to much. You can get duel interface NIC's for your servers that are fairly reasonable now. I am amazed at the push for processor speed now, I can think if very few people that NEED 3Ghz with 2Gb of RAM. However no one NEEDS a Jaguar eigther, some people just want it and if they can afford it so be it. Look at the situation this way at least if your going for over kill the network will perform well, that is better than underselling and then having your clients be upset because they are limited in the future. But hay that's just my 2 cents. Take it with a grain of salt. = ) Steven Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=65198&t=65077 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: is 10baseT dead? [7:65077]
DeVoe, Charles (PKI) wrote: > > What about htis. Rearrange those letters once more and it will apply. Just kidding! Seriously, your comment doesn't make sense. A 10-Mbps NIC must be able to accept 10 megabits worth of bits in a second unless it's broken. Are you trying to get at the situation where the server sends at 100 Mbps and the client is at 10 Mbps? Think about what is between them, i.e. a store-and-forward switch. The switch to the client will only send at 10 Mbps. Priscilla > The server tries to dump data to the client > over the 10M > pipe. The client cannot accept it as fast as the server can > put out. > Having a slower line to the client in effect will cause > degradation at the > server. > > -Original Message- > From: Steven Aiello [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 11:02 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: is 10baseT dead? [7:65077] > > > Scott, > >I think you have a great point, it seems that most of the > computer > technologies we have today are not taken full advantage of. > However > instead of taking the air out the sale's staff sales as it were > ( no pun > intended ). Why not suggest upgrade from the Idf's to the > server farm. > You could suggest Ether Channel to combine some of the runs > you have > put in ( I'm sure ) when you are upgrading your networks. This > way you > have more bandwidth to the server farm and fault tolerance. WOW > now > that's a selling point. Also it can be done with out raising > up the > costs on hardware to much. You can get duel interface NIC's > for your > servers that are fairly reasonable now. I am amazed at the > push for > processor speed now, I can think if very few people that NEED > 3Ghz with > 2Gb of RAM. However no one NEEDS a Jaguar eigther, some people > just > want it and if they can afford it so be it. Look at the > situation this > way at least if your going for over kill the network will > perform well, > that is better than underselling and then having your clients > be upset > because they are limited in the future. > > But hay that's just my 2 cents. Take it with a grain of salt. > > = ) > > Steven > > Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=65224&t=65077 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
