Forgive me if this sounds a little bit basic but this is what happens when
you
rush into things without understanding the fundamentals.
Suppose a 24 port 100Mbit switch called A is uplinked to another 24 port
100Mb
switch called B via a 1Gb connnection.
Suppose hosts D through N are on switch A an
y running 100Mb. If this is correct then I lay this
question to rest.
Thanks.
Vijay Ramcharan
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of
Vijay Ramcharan
Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2001 12:06 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: elementary? [7:6359]
Forgi
conversations would traverse the link in a
FIFO manner (First In, First Out).
hope that makes sense (as opposed to hth)
Andy
- Original Message -
From: "Vijay Ramcharan"
To:
Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2001 5:05 AM
Subject: elementary? [7:6359]
> Forgive me if this sounds a little
01 9:54 AM
Subject: RE: elementary? [7:6359]
> Thanks everyone for their replies. As I now understand it, the 1Gb
> uplink just moves data faster than... say, a 100Mb uplink. Correct?
> Conversations between hosts on each switch still take place one at a
> time, thereby obeying Etherne
TECTED]
Subject: Re: elementary? [7:6359]
N.
nononononono.
CSMA/CD only gets used when you are not in full duplex. (/me ducks) ( i
have NEVER seen a full-dup. hub) meaning that if i am using a switch capable
of full duplex (as most are) ..conversations, every station can transmit as
much as
001 10:14 AM
Subject: RE: elementary? [7:6359]
> Hhh... Not so sure this is exactly right..
>
> With full duplex, you have effectively created two "directions" --- there
> and back.
>
> I believe it is accurate to say that only one packet can be on the wire
pe
not on a switch, and hubs arent full duplex.
-peter slow
- Original Message -
From: "Chuck Larrieu"
To:
Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2001 11:14 AM
Subject: RE: elementary? [7:6359]
> Hhh... Not so sure this is exactly right..
>
> With full duplex, you have
They would be multiplexed. Ethernet allows many "conversations" between
many hosts on the same wire.
-Original Message-
From: Vijay Ramcharan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2001 12:06 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: elementary? [7:6359]
Forgive me if t
n
- Original Message -
From: "Chuck Larrieu"
To:
Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2001 11:14 AM
Subject: RE: elementary? [7:6359]
> Hhh... Not so sure this is exactly right..
>
> With full duplex, you have effectively created two "directions" ---
there
> an
r network accordingly.
>
> Alan
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Chuck Larrieu"
> To:
> Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2001 11:14 AM
> Subject: RE: elementary? [7:6359]
>
>
> > Hhh... Not so sure this is exactly right..
> >
ot so sure, but then I'm just an old dog.
Chuck
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of
Gareth Hinton
Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2001 10:14 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: elementary? [7:6359]
I think everybody might be ri
sent
out of the Gb uplink.
Does this make sense?
Vijay Ramcharan
Vijay Ramcharan
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of
Chuck Larrieu
Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2001 3:51 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: elementary? [7:6359]
I concur. I sh
esday, May 30, 2001 3:51 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: elementary? [7:6359]
I concur. I should have been a bit more clear in that I was addressing the
issue of a gig link between two switches.
For traffic that remains within a single switch, different things can be
done with the switch f
hat you're saying...but
>I've slept (occasionally) since then.
>
>- Original Message -
>From: "Chuck Larrieu"
>To:
>Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2001 10:14 AM
>Subject: RE: elementary? [7:6359]
>
>
> > Hhh... Not so sure this is
D]]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2001 3:51 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: elementary? [7:6359]
>
>
> I concur. I should have been a bit more clear in that I was addressing the
> issue of a gig link between two switches.
>
> For traffic that remains within a single switch, d
15 matches
Mail list logo
