Bob wrote:
>If the network gear is powered up anyhow (and it would tend to be) then
>there's really no additional overhead for it to chatter away. Routing
>updates, DHCP renewals, NetBEUI/WINS updates, spanning tree updates and a
>whole slew of other traffic is pretty normal for an "idling" LAN.
But it must reduce the bandwidth for the other users (that are on the same
segment). BTW: Spanning trees should only be done by the routers, not by
the clients AFAIK.
>The CPUs and screens are the killers and outnumber network devices by many
>times. Fortunately, "green" components are becoming more commonplace, though
>that feature can be a mixed blessing.
Yes, I have no idea if the term TCO-9x (2, 4, 5 and 9 are the alternatives
I've heard of (IIRC), there are probably more) is known to you? It's on
(more or less) every screen here in Sweden. The reason I ask is since TCO
is a Swedish union, so I have no idea on how well spread this standard is.
(Not only concerning energy, but ergonomic and how enviromental safe they
when they get trashed and I think there might be something I've overlooked.)
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.
More info can be found at;
http://www.softcon.com/archives/SURVPC.html
