Date: Tue, 24 Feb 1998 21:40:43 -0800 (PST) From: Tom <tom@sdf.com> To: John Kelly <jak@cetlink.net> Cc: Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com>, Chris Dillon <cdillon@wolves.k12.mo.us>, Adam Turoff <AdamT@smginc.com>, hackers <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>, Robert Glover <rob@f-body.org> Subject: Re: Token Ring for FreeBSD yet? Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.95q.980224213528.12581L-100000@misery.sdf.com> In-Reply-To: <34f5bd29.7750741@mail.cetlink.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 25 Feb 1998, John Kelly wrote: > On Tue, 24 Feb 1998 21:19:21 -0800 (PST), Tom <tom@sdf.com> wrote: > > > Yes, it is true. 16mbs token ring is quite fast. Token-passing is a > >bit of problem with large numbers of stations. Token networks make very > >efficient use of network bandwidth though. > > > > However, any kind of switched ethernet still blows it away. It does > >away with collision contention, and makes ethernet full duplex. > > As long as all stations are directly connected to the switch. But in > networks I've seen, only the bandwidth hogs are connected directly to > the switch while the average user station is still attached to a hub. You have to be connected to the switch for your ethernet to switched. You can't call an unswitched segment that just happens to touch a switch at some point a switched LAN. Besides I don't know anyone who does that. Nothing livens up a 10BT network like a Cisco Catalyst. Tom To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.95q.980224213528.12581L-100000>