Re: Overall networking issue...

On Oct 25, 2:47 pm, Jacob Tranholm <jacobtranh...@xxxxxxx> wrote:

I have the problem that I have to install a server on a larger
professional 100Mbit/s CAT-5 network (with about 100 desktop computers
connected and up to 2-300 more on wireless connections). This network
already has a well-functioning structure, where it is easy to transmit
information at speeds up to 100Mbit/s (the network works). My problem is
that I am not happy with the 100Mbit/s restrictions. The server already
has gigabit network card(s)... And I am wondering how/if it will be
possible to use the gigabit speed without having to change the basic
structure of the network. Because the network is already up and running,
I will get a hard time finding the funds to change everything, and since
100Mbit/s is sufficient in the vast majority of situations, it should
not be necessary.

You'll find that your easy fixes probably won't work.

What would happen if one for instance attached a standard (cheap)
unmanaged gigabit switch (eg. a D-Link DGS-1008D) for such a network.
The server for one port, and the remaining 8 ports connected to the
existing 100Mbit/s network (we can find 8 vacant ports in the existing
structure). Would this give any increase in network speed with the
possibility of 2 (or more) computers at the same time being able to use
the data from the server at speeds closer to the 100Mbit/s. According to
benchmarks the server can read and write the data quite a bit faster
than required by a gigabit connection.

That would be an absolute complete disaster and would likely melt down
the entire network. When the unmanaged gigabit switch received, say,
an ARP packet, it would send it out all 8 of the ports that go to the
rest of the network. This would cause the gigabit switch to receive 7
copies of each of those 8 packets back, or 56 packets, each of which
it would attempt to echo on the 7 ports it didn't receive that packet
on. Boom.

I apologize if this is an absolutely ridiculous question. My hands-on
experience with this aspect of larger networks is unfortunately limited,
and therefore I hope for constructive advice from you.

Talk to the people who manage this large, complex network. Do not try
to wing it.

DS
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: How many differences, categories?
    ... >> relocate the pattern by a process similar to the one we used to ... Network logic is counterintuitive. ... In theory the limit to the number of connections per node ... As Kauffman varied this connectivity parameter in his generic networks, ...
    (sci.cognitive)
  • Re: win XP Pro SP2 with latest RDP. Workgroup vs. domain
    ... I do not need to setup RDP port forwarding in the Belkin router. ... the firewall did have in the exceptions screen "Remote Desktop" ... think that the "Allow remote connections RDP" and/or having the firewall RDP ... for network connections. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.work_remotely)
  • Re: [Fwd: Re: Mainframe not a good architecture for interactive was Re: What is the future of COBOL
    ... programmers do not understand the inner working of CICS and that CICS ... does not keep track of ALL terminals in a mainframe network. ... >> to a Web Server, this means that for an equal number of clients, a Web ... >>server is keeping track of 5 times the connections. ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)
  • Re: Problem for physicalist evolutionists
    ... does not a neural network make. ... potential to have an FPP, and the FPP will be some part of that ... along any of those network connections to "assemble" the picture. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Problem for physicalist evolutionists
    ... does not a neural network make. ... they do no need to communicate anything ... along any of those network connections to "assemble" the picture. ...
    (talk.origins)