mailing list archives
RE: Transit LAN vs. Individual LANs
From: Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>
Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 21:23:16 -0800
--On February 25, 2006 8:09:22 PM +0000 "Christopher L. Morrow"
<christopher.morrow () verizonbusiness com> wrote:
On Sat, 25 Feb 2006, Neil J. McRae wrote:
> An argument could be made for individual VLANs to keep things
like b- cast storms isolated. But I think the additional
complexity will cause more problems than it will solve.
Vlans will not stop all typres of broadcast storm.
So, perhaps I missed the earlier explanation, but why use switched
segments at all? if the purpose is to connect routers to routers putting
something that WILL FAIL in the middle is only going to increase your
labor costs later :(
So, for router-router links, GE doesn't have to mean switched...
Very true. In fact, GE is even easier because part of the GE standard
for UTP requires it to be Auto-MDI-Sensing (MDI vs MDI-X is handled
automatically in ALL compliant GE/TP interfaces). Thus, you can use
any eia-568[ab] cable, straight or crossed between them. (Note, USOC
cables still won't work, it has to be 568a or 568b pairing)
If it wasn't crypto-signed, it probably didn't come from me.
Re: Transit LAN vs. Individual LANs Owen DeLong (Feb 25)
Re: Transit LAN vs. Individual LANs Stephen Sprunk (Feb 25)
Re: Transit LAN vs. Individual LANs Pete Templin (Feb 26)
Re: Transit LAN vs. Individual LANs Owen DeLong (Feb 26)
RE: Transit LAN vs. Individual LANs Ejay Hire (Feb 27)