Date: Sun, 22 Aug 1999 13:36:01 -0500 (CDT) From: Chris Dillon <cdillon@wolves.k12.mo.us> To: "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> Cc: Wes Peters <wes@softweyr.com>, Cliff Skolnick <cliff@steam.com>, jay d <service_account@yahoo.com>, Evren Yurtesen <yurtesen@ispro.net.tr>, freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: multiple machines in the same network Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.10.9908221328570.83078-100000@mail.wolves.k12.mo.us> In-Reply-To: <199908220649.XAA31700@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 21 Aug 1999, Rodney W. Grimes wrote: > > On Sat, 21 Aug 1999, Wes Peters wrote: > > > > > You obviously didn't follow the links. The HP ProCurve I mentioned is $1880 > > > for 40 switched 10/100 ports with layer 3 functionality and VLAN support. > > > That's $47 port port, much lower than your $250/port, with a LOT more performance > > > also. The Tolly Group recently tested it and found it capable of sustaining > > > full wire speed on all 40 ports. I'll just be your PCI-bus box isn't going > > > to hit 4 Gbps throughput. > > > > I noticed the only "L3 support" from the spec sheets of the 4000M and > > 8000M is IGMP snooping to control multicast traffic, and "protocol > > filtering" only on the 8000M. Nothing close to IP routing, however > > (not that you said it did, specifically, just clarifying). When the > > Tolly Group said they could "sustain full wire speed on all 40 ports", > > was that testing each one at a time or all at once? My math isn't > > quite warped enough to allow 40 100Mbit/FD ports to all be saturated > > with only a 3.8Gbit backplane, unless local switching occurs on each > > of the port modules, and even then the "throughput test" would have to > > take that into account and not try to move too much data across the > > backplane. > > Your making a common mistake here when an ``ALL PORTS FULL LOAD'' test > is done, if you have 40 ports all being sent data at 100MB/sec that > data is going to have to come out on 40 ports someplace, so you only need > 4Gbit/sec of backplane to do this. Thats 4G bytes of data in, 4G > accross the backplane, and 4G back out of the box. DOH. I knew better, I just didn't have my head screwed on straight. However, only half of the expansion slots are filled and already you are able to saturate the backplane. Add a couple of gigabit ports and it makes it much easier to do. > The 3.8 Gb/s spec comes up a little short, but only buy 2 ports... > and it had better be darned efficent as far as overhead goes... Only by 2 ports until you add even more ports. :-) Regardless, the switch still looks like an extremely good buy. -- Chris Dillon - cdillon@wolves.k12.mo.us - cdillon@inter-linc.net FreeBSD: The fastest and most stable server OS on the planet. For Intel x86 and Alpha architectures (SPARC under development). ( http://www.freebsd.org ) "One should admire Windows users. It takes a great deal of courage to trust Windows with your data." To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" 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.4.10.9908221328570.83078-100000>