Date: Tue, 24 Feb 1998 19:26:57 -0600 (CST) From: Chris Dillon <cdillon@wolves.k12.mo.us> To: Adam Turoff <AdamT@smginc.com> Cc: hackers <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>, Robert Glover <rob@f-body.org> Subject: RE: Token Ring for FreeBSD yet? Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980224192042.29916B-100000@duey.hs.wolves.k12.mo.us> In-Reply-To: <34F37C2A@smginc.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 24 Feb 1998, Adam Turoff wrote: > But...but...but... > > Token Ring is the most expensive, slowest networking protocol on the > planet(*). Why wouldn't a slick, fast OS like FreeBSD support it? > > Realistically speaking, aren't there bridges that can translate > Token Ring to Ethernet? If you're installing FreeBSD, it's stupid > not to use Ethernet. The h/w is cheap and the OS support is solid. > > The other 99% of the computers on your LAN are the anomaly, not > the ethernetted FreeBSD box. > > (*) SneakerNet is slower, but costs less. :-) I wouldn't exactly call Token Ring slow just because it is only running at 4 or 16Mbit. The 16Mbit Token Ring network could run circles around any 10Mbit Ethernet network. On a heavily congested network, even a 4Mbit Token Ring network could outrun a 10Mbit Ethernet network, simply because of the token-passing scheme that Token Ring uses. CSMA/CD just isn't very efficient on a heavily loaded network. The CSMA/CD network (Ethernet) would spend more time dealing with collisions than it would passing usable data. FDDI and Arcnet have the same advantages. There was even an 80Mbit Arcnet proposal at one time, which would have been much better than Ethernet. Frankly, I would consider Ethernet just above SneakerNet in the protocol arena, not the other way around. :-) 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.3.96.980224192042.29916B-100000>