But the performance is still much faster than manually routing everything.
After the first couple of packets, the switch doesn't need to go through the
router to reach the other subnet. So, in fact, it is really like layer 3
switching.
"Kent Hundley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
icrosoft.com...
> Ron,
>
> layer 3 switching = routing
>
> "layer 3 switching" is just a marketing term thought up by sales droids to
> confuse the masses. At most, layer 3 switching means "fast routing and
> fowarding". You have asics and software enhancements, but the basic
> foundation its still a layer 3 path determination and forwarding based on
> that information, i.e what we called routing in the old days.
>
> Hope that sheds some light.
>
> -Kent
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> Ron Stark
> Sent: Friday, July 21, 2000 10:06 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: LAN design
>
>
> Hi people,
>
> I have a design question that I was wondering if someone could shed some
> light
> on. With all the talk of layer3 switching these days, is it a good idea to
> switch at the core? Shouldn't the core be routed?
>
> Thanks - Ron
>
>
> ___________________________________
> UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html
> FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com
> Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> ___________________________________
> UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html
> FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com
> Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ---
___________________________________
UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
