On Mon, Oct 12, 1998 at 10:15:31AM +0300, Cracu wrote:
> I intend to set up a medium network (more than 50 computers) on
> thin ethernet. For that purpose, and due to phisical placement i created 9
> phisical subnetworks which i intend to connect by using linux boxes set up
> like BRouters. The BRouters (2 or 3, depending on the number of NICs of
> each ) will be connected on a backbone with the server which provides the
> Internet connection by the means of an ADSL modem.
My suggestion would be to buy a single, dedicated hardware switch - e.g. a
3com Superstack 1100 (12 or 24 ports). This will be much more reliable than
a cluster of PCs (no hard disk or floppy drive to fail) and requires zero
administration. It is also difficult to build a router with 4 or more NICs,
unless you use a multiport NIC (e.g. www.znyx.com) and they are so expensive
that you could just buy a switch anyway.
As a separate point, do you really _have_ to use thinnet? Using UTP will be
much more reliable; if one of your network cards starts to 'jabber' (and
I've seen cheap ones fail in this way before), then the hub will isolate it,
so that (a) your network keeps running, and (b) you can see immediately
which card is faulty and needs to be replaced. The cables are much easier to
make, too, and 8 port hubs are really cheap these days.
This is a lesson I learned from bitter experience, believe me... in an
environment where students would insist on pulling thinnet cables out of the
back of PCs and break the connectors off in the process.
Regards,
Brian.
(P.S. If you are building routers, these days I'd say 8MB RAM minimum,
unless you're going to run an old 1.2.13 kernel)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
