On Tue, 16 Nov 1999, you wrote:
-Why is a switch (or bridge) a bad idea?
It's not. Like anything else in a network, switches and bridges have
their place. When I was in college I did network installation for
schools and sometime just adding a switch to segment the LAN did
wonders for the performance.
The current rage for putting everything on a switch is really
overkill. Most people do not use the bandwidth they already have.
However, the perception is often enough to quiet a squeaky wheel.
Several times I have moved a noisy user from a hub to a switch and,
even tho traffic measurements showed no differences, they couldn't
say enough good things about how much better things were. Go figger
In fact, in a broadcast intensive environment (Windows!) switching
can actually _hurt_ performance!
- > A switch is really nothing more than a bridge anyway. Everyone decided
- > that bridges are bad, so the marketing folks renamed them and
- > repositioned them in the market.
- >
- > Stephen Carville wrote:
- > >
- > > A switched hub is a multiport bridge. IOW the same thing as a
- > > switch. Why it is called a 'switched hub' instead of a 'switch?'
- > > Dunno. Someone in marketing probably thought it would sell better.
- > >
--
Stephen Carville
----------------------------------------------------
A well educated citizenry, being essential to the maintenance of a free
society, the right of the people, to keep and read books shall not be
infringed.
