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.
> 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
"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
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
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
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
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
"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
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
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:
>
>
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
;If you need to even go close to the 100 Meter mark you
> > >should consider 100BaseFX or similar.
> > >
> > >Shawn
> > >
> > >-Original Message-
> > >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Li
> > >Song
> >
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
<[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
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
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
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
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
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
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,
--- 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
) 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
l Message-
> >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Li
> >Song
> >Sent: Monday, December 25, 2000 4:33 AM
> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Subject: is this statement true ??
> >
> >"full-duplex can be used over longer distance th
illa
>If you need to even go close to the 100 Meter mark you
>should consider 100BaseFX or similar.
>
>Shawn
>
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Li
>Song
>Sent: Monday, December 25, 2000 4:33 AM
>To: [EMAIL PROTEC
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
PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Li
Song
Sent: Monday, December 25, 2000 4:33 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: is this statement true ??
"full-duplex can be used over longer distance than
half-duplex" ??
what 's your opinion ??
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 ??
>
>
> ___
December 25, 2000 10:33 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: is this statement true ??
>
>
> "full-duplex can be used over longer distance than
> half-duplex" ??
> what 's your opinion ??
>
>
> _
> FAQ, list archives, a
"full-duplex can be used over longer distance than
half-duplex" ??
what 's your opinion ??
_
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
29 matches
Mail list logo
