At 08:32 PM 10/24/01 -0700, Chuck Larrieu wrote: >interesting points, and well taken. > >if one takes VLANs to be synonymous with subnets then sure. > >your 10.0.0.0/16 thought reminds me of the good old days when the Xylan >marketing team was out hawking their "flatten the network" religion. In this >respect I am a traditionalist - route where you can, and bridge where you >must. > >yeah, I keep forgetting that Windows does some broadcasting, but recall that >I come out of the brokerage industry, where broadcast was a necessity. How >else would quote machines work? Upwards of 80-90% of our LAN traffic during >market hours was broadcast. So how much broadcast traffic can a couple >hundred windoze boxes really create, and just how badly does that really >effect network performance? Particularly if you are running a fully switched >environment, or even in a hubbed environment, assuming 12-24 port hubs? When >I was young and foolish, I ran my network on daisy chained 48 port hubs, and >I think I got up to around 125 stations and printers before I regretted my >foolishness. This was in that self same brokerage firm, with the outrageous >broadcast traffic. I know a Major Bank where they at one time ran segments >of 700-100 end stations. And survived to a certain degree. ( although they >were the masters of broadcast control :-> ) > >As I said, your points are well taken. the application drives most things, >but the architecture surely drives others. > >thanks. > >Chuck
Well, I admit, my response was a bit clouded by the fact that one of our clients recently requested a redesign of their flat beyond flat network. Call it justification! They are using, UGH, 10BaseT Hubs with some nasTY (with an iintentional capital T and Y), daisy chaining hub action, which REALLY exacerbated performance loss. Not to mention it's all Bay GEAR! Evil! :) Admittedly, that IS changing the premise of Priscilla's original statement. The network I am working on is HARDLY the epitome of the modern day model system Priscilla described. I am guessing with solid switches across the board, it might very well be "pretty darn good" in terms of performance. I was just curious where the new practical bar was raised to. If the situation is with 10BaseT hubs, I would not be surprised if performance is really becoming an issue where broadcasts become a percentage of your daily bandwidth. Where broadcasts are probably far more often being that even unicast packets are broadcasted on the wonderous layer 1 repeater technology known as hubs. With all switches, I am not too sure I can say clearly otherwise, but I was just wondering "how far" is a practical limit in today's modern systems? On top of that, yes, all in moderation. If we take either approach to the extreme, we clearly see significant flaws. No one wants to run subnets of 2 usable hosts each for their entire network and smash their catalyst 6509 with routing modules to oblivion. No one wants to run the 30,000 flat network from HecK. (Ok, maybe some people do...) "Look Ma, no routers!" On the side, you just noticed your statement impies that some would run multiple VLANs with a single subnet? I guess you would depend on having at least one port on both VLANs to get interconnectivity? Would that be like bridging? (unifying two layer 2 networks). Her statements on the windows protocol seem correct. Ugh, I got to whip out the old sniffer again. Or read up again. I could have sworn I STILL saw a multitude of crap flying every second on my old college network even after we went to a switch. I should try again since her points seem quite valid. Hm. Although broadcasting was necessary, in the more extreme case, does it make sense for a quote server to broadcast to another quote server? There is a small subsegment of "don't cares" for the quotes, it seems like multicast is more ideal, but probably not necessary. No matter, I am sure the demigods of broadcast control had a working solution. :) -Carroll Kong Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=24080&t=23950 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
