ARP/broadcast rules, especially when you have a customer whose network see's over 200mbps of it on a regular basis. Although pumping out 2Gbps out the wire to the internet does bring with it some networking "overhead" ;)
The more hosts you have, and the bigger the subnets these machines live on, the more crazy ARP traffic you see. Who needs VLAN's these days anyway hehe ;) Regards, Adam. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Edward Luna Sent: Friday, 22 December 2006 3:20 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [hlds] Post-outage thoughts We may be saying the same thing. In a network comprised of 3 hubs (2 uplinks) all Ethernet traffic is offered to all ports on all hubs but on the same network using 3 switches, Ethernet traffic destined for a specific host (port) on switch 3 will only be presented to that port. Broadcasts are presented to the entire network in all cases. -----Original Message----- From: Whisper [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2006 9:31 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [hlds] Post-outage thoughts -- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] That is very bad The point of running a switch in the first place is to microsegment your network so every port becomes a collision domain. Where is that guy with then CCNA when you need him. Collisions are not the problem anyhow on switched Ethernet networks, it is broadcasts. On 12/22/06, Edward Luna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I agree that switches are a technical leap forward from hubs but to > say hubs "suck" is to say networks sucked before switches were > prevalent and that simply is not true. Although there are numerous > differences between switches and hubs (especially managed switches) > the most striking performance factor is that switches keep track of > hosts relative to MAC address and discriminate between nodes while > hubs present all Ethernet traffic to all hosts on the network. This > feature of switches is essential in larger networks (say 48 hosts and > up with heavy Ethernet traffic) in order to limit "collisions", but of > absolutely no consequence in a small network. With today's super > smart switches, collisions may have been eliminated entirely... I'm > not certain of that however, anyone who has managed an Ethernet > network with over 48 hosts is well aware of the performance > degradation caused by collisions in networks with hubs. Rule of > thumb... large network use switches; small network, a hub will be fine (if you can even find one anymore hehehe). > > > -----Original Message----- > From: chad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2006 6:35 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [hlds] Post-outage thoughts > > > HUBS suck for more than 2 computers, and cost more than switches as > you cannot get them new anymore at stores. > however hubs are perfect for packet sniffing, and extending a cable > past the recommended cable max length, other than that they are not > economical, or sensible. > that said I just got a hub for sniffing and extending cables if need be. > > is undetectable packet sniffing on switched networks easy (without > managed switches) > > Hexis wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 20, 2006 at 08:53:20AM +0000, Gigabit Nick wrote: > > > >> Most modern ADSL/Wireless routers have auto sensing non-manageable > >> switches in them because the hardware is cheap and packet sniffing > >> made people wary of hubs. > >> > > > > Not so much. Hubs offer less performance due to their nature. At > > this point there is little or no advantage to a hub over a switch, > > and significant disabvantages. The market has migrated to small > > unmanaged switches being the norm for home networking. Now it will > > cost you more to buy a hub instead of a switch. Hubs have become > > speciality items for specific purposes. > > > > That and packet sniffing on a switched network is pretty trivial. > > Not as simple as on a hub, but still quite easy. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list > > archives, > please visit: > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > > > _______________________________________________ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > -- _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
