>The catalyst 6000 series supports upto 130 Gb ports. And the backplane
>capacity is 32 gbps.
>
>So if i use all the 130 gigabit ports , does it mean that i am
>overutilizing.
>
>I cant relate the sizing of the ports to the switch backplane capacity.
>
>Thanks in advance for any clarifications recvd.
>
>Gayathri
Whether or not any switch/relay/router etc. is oversubscribed or is
blocking or nonblocking is separate from whether any of these
characteristics will be a problem. Pure capacity is something one
measures in a test lab. A nonblocking switch is defined to be one in
which when all input ports simultaneously transmit to a set of output
ports, and there are 1:1 relationships between input and output
ports, there will be no loss caused by the switching fabric.
Scenario 1:
A switch has 5 input ports and 5 output ports. Each port is 100
Mbps. The fabric is 10 Gbps.
Output ports 1 and 2 have application servers. Port 3 has DNS, port
4 has DHCP, and port 5 connects to a router. All input ports have
client workstations. Most work is between clients and one of the
local servers.
Does oversubscription exist here? If so, where? Is it a problem?
Also consider that the nature of the applications is that there is
a brief exchange between the client and server, followed by lengthy
and variable work at the client. Think of a graphics art shop, where
the artists download graphics files and then work on them.
Scenario 2:
A switch has 20 user ports (10 Mbps) and one 100 Mbps uplink port.
The fabric is 1 Gbps. The application is highly interactive, with the
user either examining a response or generating a query; the only
possible simultaneous traffic are ACKs for previously sent data. Two
of the user ports connect to local printers, but all other work must
go over the uplink.
Does oversubscription existg here? If so, where? Is it a problem?
_________________________________
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
