to wireless link to switch to Internet.
Thanks
KM
From: Priscilla Oppenheimer
Reply-To: Priscilla Oppenheimer
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Switch Design Question [7:39888]
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 13:12:32 -0500
Do you know if there was a reason for Switch 3 being in the design? That's
what I
it at the location
of switch4, that is the only location DSL is available.
Hope you had a Great Easter
KM
From: Mark Odette II
Reply-To: Mark Odette II
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Switch Design Question [7:39888]
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 15:59:18 -0500
I was gonna say, perhaps the Switch2 has a Fiber
DN
link to switch to wireless link to switch to Internet.
Thanks
KM
From: Priscilla Oppenheimer
Reply-To: Priscilla Oppenheimer
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Switch Design Question [7:39888]
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 13:12:32 -0500
Do you know if there was a reason for Switch 3 being in th
Although most of the latency comes from your wireless link and the ISP
connection, it still doesn't mean you shouldn't optimize the setup a bit.
You mentioned in a later email that the reason for switch2 and 3 is that
they needed more ports. That's fine, and there's nothing wrong with that
type
Although most of the latency comes from your wireless link and the ISP
connection, it still doesn't mean you shouldn't optimize the setup a bit.
You mentioned in a later email that the reason for switch2 and 3 is that
they needed more ports. That's fine, and there's nothing wrong with that
type
At 9:26 AM -0500 3/29/02, KM Reynolds wrote:
Hi All,
I am looking at this configuration:
[PC]---[Switch1]---Fiber---[Switch2]---[Switch3]---[WirelessBridge]---distance2miles---[WirelessBridge]---[4Switch10Mb]---[Router]---[ISPInternet]
The switches are all consist of 10Mb ports. The question.
In a 10Mb environ, what the heck! I would speculate that double-up won't
make an ROI out of consolidation.
However, this brings up a nasty little problem I'm looking at, and I might
phrase this another way. How many cascaded switching devices can exist in a
broadcast domain without creating
If the reason for the second switch is you ran out of ports, replacing
it with a larger switch is fine if money in no object or you have
another use for these two switches. Otherwise I wouldn't worry, the
latency, though measurable is nothing to worry about compared to your
Internet connection.
Do you know if there was a reason for Switch 3 being in the design? That's
what I would try to find out
Maybe it was necessary because Switch 2 is located in a wiring closet,
whereas Switch 3 and the Wireless Bridge are in the main distribution
frame. Or maybe Switch 2 only has
Isn't the issue of the maximum number of cascaded switches mostly a
questions of how long it would take to reconfigure the spanning tree when
problems occur? A max of 7 is recommended based on the timing of
Configuration BPDUs, etc.
I don't think it's really an issue of how much latency is
In the topology given, the real bottleneck is the wireless bridge ( assuming
11 meg shared ), and of course the ISP link speed.
the switch to switch latency is not the killer here.
other factors are numbers of users, especially the numbers crossing the
wireless link. These suckers still tend to
: Switch Design Question [7:39888]
At 9:26 AM -0500 3/29/02, KM Reynolds wrote:
Hi All,
I am looking at this configuration:
[PC]---[Switch1]---Fiber---[Switch2]---[Switch3]---[WirelessBridge]---dista
nce2miles---[WirelessBridge]---[4Switch10Mb]---[Router]---[ISPInternet]
The switches are all
12 matches
Mail list logo
