From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jun 19 14:10:45 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07582106564A for ; Fri, 19 Jun 2009 14:10:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jbaltz@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ew0-f212.google.com (mail-ew0-f212.google.com [209.85.219.212]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84C688FC13 for ; Fri, 19 Jun 2009 14:10:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jbaltz@gmail.com) Received: by ewy8 with SMTP id 8so2079513ewy.43 for ; Fri, 19 Jun 2009 07:10:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=R27DSPOXNaufSOsILDALwFOBfUhd/vX70S1jUxcisB0=; b=OOZW2080OQ8btBX5O2MOAj0P5PuhLZn/udVdXSTPNmOQcLi9IAZV8ugOnpLZErEHIZ 1XH4A0NIU9o/UkW1eKN8PgmFHLKo8wZX0sa/aR4S/tdiqry0dM+BgNgRWhO6iWUj5vKM dc7NZejGbZLVwIMnqasoSAg75Uo4cspKP+yi4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=W8zedTVa0sl37Mh/1CsQk2qgcFCMBbBGK7uqY1ufdHn9ujtjSUNiTIN3PNN3n8y0dr 4lihjYUZ8i1SlcNeovvQh3NsVDN2QLILLHv6pJEVwy1rMgJHDANeB8Yl/nYOMM69mzSs atB/W1Ea6d+pNvAUq5t3wt4wxqMTWqdogBQHM= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.3.195 with SMTP id 45mr1007221weh.8.1245418644801; Fri, 19 Jun 2009 06:37:24 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4A3B66ED.40506@gmx.com> References: <4A3B66ED.40506@gmx.com> Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 09:37:24 -0400 Message-ID: <2b677bda0906190637h45e135bfk5f47762d3c15badb@mail.gmail.com> From: "Jerry B. Altzman" To: Nikos Vassiliadis Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: off topic: unmanageable switch? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 14:10:45 -0000 On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 06:22, Nikos Vassiliadis wrote: > > My list of priorities, with 1 being the most important. > 1. Price > 2. Stability > 3. No "smart" features > OK, this looks like a .1Q frame, let's drop it. > This MAC address is active on many ports, let's drop it. > 4. STP support > Would be nice, just to prevent cabling errors. > There is not gonna be deliberate use of duplicate > links between the switches to increase availability. > Do you require Gigabit ethernet or no? I've had very good experience with Netgear 24-port and 16-port rack mount switches (not the desktop consumer models -- although they too have worked well for me). They have somewhat more robust power supplies than the standard wall-attach transformers, and the FastEthernet models can be had for VERY cheap. (I bought a 24-port model a few years back for just about USD 100.) I've had Netgear switches run without a problem for *years*. Their managed switches, on the other hand, are a nightmare, and I wouldn't use them again if I had the choice. Nikos > //jbaltz -- jerry b. altzman jbaltz@gmail.com www.jbaltz.com foo mane padme hum