Re: Confused (was Re: is this statement true ??)

2000-12-28 Thread Priscilla Oppenheimer
OK, if we really want to get nitty-gritty: The jam signal is 32 bits. The preamble is 10101010 etc, or AA in HEX. The last byte is 10101011, or AB. You can actually see AAs sometimes on a Sniffer when there's a collision and the Sniffer captures someone else's preamble on the end of a frame.

RE: Confused (was Re: is this statement true ??)

2000-12-28 Thread John lay
> was kinda interesting. > > Shawn > > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > Priscilla Oppenheimer > Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2000 2:06 PM > To: Andy Walden; John lay > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re

Re: Confused (was Re: is this statement true ??)

2000-12-27 Thread Jeff Kell
"Bowen, Shawn" wrote: > > I believe we are saying mostly the same thing. Your "* Extended carrier to > indicate busy (assert carrier beyond the length of the packet)." Is an > Ethernet JAM signal. > And I also guess I wanted to point out that the Cisco documentation is > not "always" 100% accu

RE: Confused (was Re: is this statement true ??)

2000-12-27 Thread John lay
thought this > was kinda interesting. > > Shawn > > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > Priscilla Oppenheimer > Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2000 2:06 PM > To: Andy Walden; John lay > Cc: [EM

RE: Confused (was Re: is this statement true ??)

2000-12-27 Thread Tony van Ree
16 AM > To: Bowen, Shawn > Cc: Priscilla Oppenheimer; Andy Walden; John lay; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Confused (was Re: is this statement true ??) > > "Bowen, Shawn" wrote: > > > > Yup, makes sense. I can only speak for 3Com on this one, but I bel

RE: Confused (was Re: is this statement true ??)

2000-12-26 Thread Bowen, Shawn
j/k Shawn -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jeff Kell Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2000 12:16 AM To: Bowen, Shawn Cc: Priscilla Oppenheimer; Andy Walden; John lay; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Confused (was Re: is this statement true

RE: Confused (was Re: is this statement true ??)

2000-12-26 Thread Bowen, Shawn
ld. Shawn -Original Message- From: Jeff Kell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2000 12:16 AM To: Bowen, Shawn Cc: Priscilla Oppenheimer; Andy Walden; John lay; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Confused (was Re: is this statement true ??) "Bowen, Shawn" wro

Re: Confused (was Re: is this statement true ??)

2000-12-26 Thread Jeff Kell
"Bowen, Shawn" wrote: > > Yup, makes sense. I can only speak for 3Com on this one, but I believe > Cisco implements similar features. On a 3Com Corebuilder (as well as their > Workgroup Switches) they use fake collisions as a flow control mechanism. > In other words if there was contention at t

RE: Confused (was Re: is this statement true ??)

2000-12-26 Thread Bowen, Shawn
ECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Priscilla Oppenheimer Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2000 2:06 PM To: Andy Walden; John lay Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Confused (was Re: is this statement true ??) I think what John is getting at is that there is still contention. In his example wit

Re: is this statement true ??

2000-12-26 Thread Jim Erickson
I personally prefer: "This statement is false." -- ---JRE--- ""Howard C. Berkowitz"" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:p05001900b66eb91b9df9@[63.216.127.98]... > The title of this thread has been driving me crazy. Let me offer an > alternative statement to be evaluated: > >

RE: is this statement true ??

2000-12-26 Thread Howard C. Berkowitz
The title of this thread has been driving me crazy. Let me offer an alternative statement to be evaluated: "I am lying." Returning to rationality... _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report mi

RE: is this statement true ??

2000-12-26 Thread Priscilla Oppenheimer
The question was whether full-duplex can be longer than half-duplex. This is only an issue for Ethernet CSMA/CD and it has nothing to do with attenuation. Priscilla At 01:31 PM 12/26/00, Tony van Ree wrote: >Hi, > >Be aware that the are two points here one is the collision type argument >that

Re: Confused (was Re: is this statement true ??)

2000-12-26 Thread Priscilla Oppenheimer
I think what John is getting at is that there is still contention. In his example with two clients trying to reach one server, there's contention at the switch, and at the server possibly. There's no contention on the medium itself. There's only one device trying to send at any one time. The sw

Re: is this statement true ??

2000-12-26 Thread Priscilla Oppenheimer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Li Song" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2000 1:47 PM >Subject: RE: is this statement true ?? > > > > At 01:07 PM 12/25/00, Bowen, Shawn wrote: > > >According to IEEE NO, 100 Meters

RE: is this statement true ??

2000-12-26 Thread Priscilla Oppenheimer
ut the Technical Compendium link. > >Merry Christmas to all, > Shawn > >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >[<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of >Priscilla Oppenheimer >Sent: Monday, December 25, 2000

RE: Confused (was Re: is this statement true ??)

2000-12-26 Thread MCDONALD, ROMAN (SBCSI)
Remember - Full Duplex needs microsegmentation. -Original Message- From: Bowen, Shawn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2000 8:30 AM To: John lay; Priscilla Oppenheimer; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Confused (was Re: is this statement true ??) Good Question Jon

Re: Confused (was Re: is this statement true ??)

2000-12-26 Thread Andy Walden
This is correct. You don't use full duplex if you are competing for bandwidth, ie, plugged into a hub. But if you are plugged into a switch, there is only one bandwidth domain between the device and switch and with nothing competing for the bandwidth on that link so you can go full duplex. andy

RE: Confused (was Re: is this statement true ??)

2000-12-26 Thread Bowen, Shawn
PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of John lay Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2000 6:51 AM To: Priscilla Oppenheimer; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Confused (was Re: is this statement true ??) Priscilla, everybody, I am confused. Ethernet and FastEthernet uses the CSMA/CD as a channel alloc

Confused (was Re: is this statement true ??)

2000-12-26 Thread John lay
Priscilla, everybody, I am confused. Ethernet and FastEthernet uses the CSMA/CD as a channel allocation techinque in a shared media access envoiroment. Here it comes the confusion, when you are saying that the Full-duplex does not support CSMA/CD because the transmit and receive are on different

RE: is this statement true ??

2000-12-25 Thread Bowen, Shawn
o all, Shawn -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Priscilla Oppenheimer Sent: Monday, December 25, 2000 7:47 PM To: Bowen, Shawn; Li Song; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: is this statement true ?? At 01:07 PM 12/25/00,

Re: is this statement true ??

2000-12-25 Thread leonz
--- Original Message - From: "Priscilla Oppenheimer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Bowen, Shawn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Li Song" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2000 1:47 PM Subject: RE: is this statement tru

Re: is this statement true ??

2000-12-25 Thread leonz
) where half-duplex distance limit is 412m and the full-duplex limit is 2km. Leon Chang CCNP, CCDA - Original Message - From: "Priscilla Oppenheimer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Li Song" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, December

RE: is this statement true ??

2000-12-25 Thread Tony van Ree
Hi, Be aware that the are two points here one is the collision type argument that is we need to be sure all have seen the pulses on the line prior to themselves transmitting. The other is pure attenuation that is the weakening of the signal as it attempts to change the state of the line. (As

RE: is this statement true ??

2000-12-25 Thread Priscilla Oppenheimer
At 01:07 PM 12/25/00, Bowen, Shawn wrote: >According to IEEE NO, 100 Meters is the max cable distance for Half or Full >100MB Ethernet over TP. In reality, Yes it will extend the range, The >reason why is that at full duplex you can not have collisions, and >collisions are the main reason for the

Re: is this statement true ??

2000-12-25 Thread Priscilla Oppenheimer
It's true for Ethernet because Ethernet's CSMA/CD media access control method has strict timing requirements, which result in strict length restrictions. Half-duplex uses CSMA/CD. Full-duplex does not. I wouldn't say it's true in general, however. Priscilla At 05:32 PM 12/25/00, Li Song wrote

RE: is this statement true ??

2000-12-25 Thread Bowen, Shawn
According to IEEE NO, 100 Meters is the max cable distance for Half or Full 100MB Ethernet over TP. In reality, Yes it will extend the range, The reason why is that at full duplex you can not have collisions, and collisions are the main reason for the distance limitation (Cross Talk comes into pl

Re: is this statement true ??

2000-12-25 Thread ItsMe
FALSE!! At best the maximum range of full and half will equal. ""Li Song"" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message 9278a3$4a6$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:9278a3$4a6$[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > "full-duplex can be used over longer distance than > half-duplex" ?? > what 's your opinion ?? > > > ___

RE: is this statement true ??

2000-12-25 Thread Timothy Metz
I think I saw that on the boson switching tests I've never heard that full duplex extends range... did they offer the usual cco url as a reference? Tim > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > Li Song > Sent: Monday, December 25, 2000 10