> Yes, I was considering star topology as the most
> sensible one. However, ring topology and several others still use a
> hub.
I was holding off commenting on this until I could verify my recollections,
and having done so, I feel obliged to point out that I have worked with the
following types of network:
Ring topology with no hub (at the moment, the majority of my systems are
constructed in this way)
Star topology with no hub (unless you count a server as a hub, which I
don't, because it's a computer duplicating all packets on all lines, working
mainly as a proxy)
Star topology with a hub
Token Ring (not really a ring, each machine is connected to a 'hub' (not
called that) which then cascade down to more 'hubs' (with another different
name) and then out to a server or backbone. I never want to work with Token
Ring again. Ever.)
Also, I have used a network where all the connection is done using TP RJ45,
like a 10BaseT system, except the adapters are daisy chained to each other
in ring fashion.
Regards, Web: http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Horizon/8786
Ben A L Jemmett ICQ: 9848866 JGSD e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
'<INSERT SOME CORNY QUOTE HERE>'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from SURVPC send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
unsubscribe SURVPC in the body of the message.
Also, trim this footer from any quoted replies.
