RE: is 10baseT dead? [7:65263]

2003-03-19 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Nemeth)
cal } To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] } Subject: RE: is 10baseT dead? [7:65263] } Amendment: I meant to say free book to the FIRST person who gets the right } answer.: -) You must show your work... } Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] } } It's been a long day. } } [snip] } }-- End of excerpt from &

Re: is 10baseT dead? [7:65263]

2003-03-14 Thread Priscilla Oppenheimer
I'm glad we're discussing this. I mentioned that CCIE used to have questions like this, but it occurred to me that CCNA expects you to understand flow control too! This is an important conversation. In your printing example, Scott, you've got flow control running at lots of different layers! Indee

RE: is 10baseT dead? [7:65263]

2003-03-14 Thread Joseph Malin
start > dropping packets? > > A free book to anyone who gets the right answer! You must show > your work. :-) --- -Original Message- From: Priscilla Oppenheimer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March

RE: is 10baseT dead? [7:65263]

2003-03-14 Thread s vermill
Priscilla, Your below questions and points are all damned good ones. You've obviously thought it out quite a bit more than I (and anyway, I already own all your books so the incentive just wasn't there!). I guess I don't know enough about what a "typical" client-server transaction looks like. F

Re: is 10baseT dead? [7:65263]

2003-03-14 Thread s vermill
M.C. van den Bovenkamp wrote: > > s vermill wrote: > > > I'm just not sure there's a good real-world example to help > us with the > > theoretical "what if" question. In what scenario would a > large transfer of > > data be attempted with out any type of flow control in the > stack somewhere? >

RE: is 10baseT dead? [7:65263]

2003-03-14 Thread Priscilla Oppenheimer
packet is 100 bytes. > > > > The switch is sending the packets out the 10-Mbps port as fast > > as it can. > > > > After how many packets sent by the server will the switch > start > > dropping packets? > > > > A free book to anyone who gets the right answer! You must show > > your work. :-) >

Re: is 10baseT dead? [7:65263]

2003-03-14 Thread M.C. van den Bovenkamp
s vermill wrote: > I'm just not sure there's a good real-world example to help us with the > theoretical "what if" question. In what scenario would a large transfer of > data be attempted with out any type of flow control in the stack somewhere? Try NFS over UDP. That'll go down the tubes pretty

RE: is 10baseT dead? [7:65263]

2003-03-14 Thread Joseph Malin
= 1142.8571428571428571428571428571 The 1142th packet will go through and the 1143th will be the first to be dropped due to a buffer overflow. -Original Message- From: Priscilla Oppenheimer To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 3/13/2003 6:54 PM Subject: RE: is 10baseT dead? [7:65263] So, here was my

RE: is 10baseT dead? [7:65263]

2003-03-14 Thread Priscilla Oppenheimer
t; > > > t = 0.011428571428571428571428571428571 seconds until the > > buffer is > > completely full. > > > > bitcount = (80,000,000 bps) x t = (80,000,000 bps) x > > 0.011508433379980849966855711865655 s = > > 914285.7142857142857142857

RE: is 10baseT dead? [7:65263]

2003-03-14 Thread Priscilla Oppenheimer
> > > > > The switch has 1000 buffers. Each buffer holds a 100-byte > > > packet. > > > > > > The server is sending 100,000 packets per second as fast as > it > > > can (i.e. with no significant gap between the packets). Each > > >

Re: is 10baseT dead? [7:65263]

2003-03-14 Thread s vermill
And as a follow up to the below, I just captured a print job on our corp network using Ethereal. I run Win2k Pro. Don't know anything about the print server itself. Here's what I saw... Microsoft Spool Subsystem (SPOOLSS) / DCE RPC / SMB / netBIOS / TCP VERY chatty. I don't see how 10M could

Re: is 10baseT dead? [7:65263]

2003-03-14 Thread s vermill
Priscilla, Yeah, this is evolving beyond a simple server-switch-host discussion. I think, now that we're adding routers to the mix, it's important to note that things are handled quite differently depening on what layer we're talking about. I deal with a lot of telemetry applications. Telemetry

RE: is 10baseT dead? [7:65263]

2003-03-14 Thread Priscilla Oppenheimer
packetcount = 914285.71428571428571428571428571 b / 100 B = > 914285.71428571428571428571428571 b / 800 b = > 1142.8571428571428571428571428571 > > The 1142th packet will go through and the 1143th will be the > first to be > dropped due to a buffer overflow. > > -Original Message

Re: is 10baseT dead? [7:65263]

2003-03-14 Thread s vermill
Steven, Thanks for sharing. A real example is just what the doctor ordered. In your below example, did the print transaction rely on TCP at L4? I've captured some print traffic on our corp. network in the past and I'm pretty sure it was TCP. Don't know if there was a speed mismatch between the

Re: is 10baseT dead? [7:65263]

2003-03-14 Thread Steven Aiello
Ok, I am still a lowly CCNA however Einstein said make things as simple as they need to be and no more. I work on a LAN where we transmit large print files to Xerox laser printers. These files can get up to 1.5Gb in size and sometimes a bit larger. The Printers run on older Sun workstations

RE: is 10baseT dead? [7:65263]

2003-03-13 Thread Priscilla Oppenheimer
s vermill wrote: > > Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote: > > > > > DeVoe, Charles (PKI) wrote: > > > > > > > > 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. > > > > Havin

RE: is 10baseT dead? [7:65263]

2003-03-12 Thread Priscilla Oppenheimer
It's been a long day. Priscilla Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote: > > > DeVoe, Charles (PKI) wrote: > > > > > > 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 slow