[Server-devel] Fwd: Network Provisioning

2008-04-24 Thread John Watlington

On Apr 24, 2008, at 10:57 PM, Martin Langhoff wrote:

 On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 2:38 PM, John Watlington  
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  Proposed change to the hardware spec:

  From one to four access points may use an simpler switch,
  connected to the server over a 100 Mb/s link.   From five to seven
  access points will need a better switch, which provides a 1 GB/s
  link to the server.

  This means that a 1 GB/s interface should be specified for the  
 servers.

 Theoretically, yes... but perhaps this is a bit over the top. For the
 space we are aiming...

  - the XS services will bottleneck well before saturating 1Gb/s  
 traffic
  - 'upstream' services that the XS is routing will bottleneck well  
 before 1Gb/s

 if we see a 7-AP setup, it will be there to support either a large
 number of laptops or a location with obstacles that needs many
 antennaes. In any case, it will support laptops mostly peering w
 each other.

Wrong.   Right now all collaboration moves through the ejabberd server.
We hope to change that, but it won't happen for roughly a year.

 If we are designing for a client base of laptops that we actually
 expect to saturate 1Gb, then... we need to start recommending a
 mid-range server cluster, perhaps a SAN, all costing a few megabucks
 ;-)

But a school of 250 students will need at least five access points.
It only takes two laptops to saturate a channel (OK, maybe one).
So you are saying that squid or apache can't keep up with feeding
ten streams at 11+ Mb/s each ?

wad


___
Server-devel mailing list
Server-devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel


Re: [Server-devel] Fwd: Network Provisioning

2008-04-24 Thread Aaron Huslage
Typical PC hardware of the current generation can more than saturate a 1gb
link. From what I've seen on this list, most people have deployed hardware
that is certainly capable of servicing 750-1000 clients if the OS and apps
are properly tuned.

Of course if you're going to be servicing that many wireless clients, you'll
want a higher-end VAN-able WLAN setup. That'll REALLY blow the budget. :)

On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 8:22 PM, John Watlington [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


 On Apr 24, 2008, at 10:57 PM, Martin Langhoff wrote:

  On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 2:38 PM, John Watlington
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
   Proposed change to the hardware spec:
 
   From one to four access points may use an simpler switch,
   connected to the server over a 100 Mb/s link.   From five to seven
   access points will need a better switch, which provides a 1 GB/s
   link to the server.
 
   This means that a 1 GB/s interface should be specified for the
  servers.
 
  Theoretically, yes... but perhaps this is a bit over the top. For the
  space we are aiming...
 
   - the XS services will bottleneck well before saturating 1Gb/s
  traffic
   - 'upstream' services that the XS is routing will bottleneck well
  before 1Gb/s
 
  if we see a 7-AP setup, it will be there to support either a large
  number of laptops or a location with obstacles that needs many
  antennaes. In any case, it will support laptops mostly peering w
  each other.

 Wrong.   Right now all collaboration moves through the ejabberd server.
 We hope to change that, but it won't happen for roughly a year.

  If we are designing for a client base of laptops that we actually
  expect to saturate 1Gb, then... we need to start recommending a
  mid-range server cluster, perhaps a SAN, all costing a few megabucks
  ;-)

 But a school of 250 students will need at least five access points.
 It only takes two laptops to saturate a channel (OK, maybe one).
 So you are saying that squid or apache can't keep up with feeding
 ten streams at 11+ Mb/s each ?

 wad


 ___
 Server-devel mailing list
 Server-devel@lists.laptop.org
 http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel




-- 
Aaron Huslage - 503.860.1634
http://blog.hact.net
IM: AIM - ahuslage; Yahoo - ahuslage; MSN - [EMAIL PROTECTED]; GTalk -
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
Server-devel mailing list
Server-devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel