[lug] OT: network gear

[Nate Duehr]

Some switches are cheaper than others and don't have enough backplane speed
nor buffering between ports to truely offer full switched services between
multiple machines.  Many switch vendors on the low-end are loathe to tell
you this or give you buffer sizes, maximum packet rates with 2 machines, 3
machines, 4 machines, etc... running... and in general the cheaper the
switch, the less backplane raw speed it has and the less buffering.

There most definitely *is* a difference between a SOHO no-name 5 port
"switch" from the local computer store and even a low-end Cisco Catalyst
switch.

And of course if you wander up to Gigabit speeds and play with the Cat
4000's and 6000's... well... whole different planet.

Nate, nate at natetech.com

Ferdinand Schmid wrote:

> Hugh Brown wrote:
> >
> > My bad.
> >
> > 10/100 switches.  Looking at the 16port variety.
> >
> <snip>
> I found some strange behavior with 32 port switches from D-Link and Cnet
> ( I don't have a Linksys).
> I connected two computers via 10.1.1.x and 172.168.200.x networks.  If
> the switches (I tested the before mentioned two) would work properly
> then I would expect to get roughly 100 mBit/s throughput from each NIC.
> However I only got a total of about 100 mBit/s between the two.  Upon
> running one of the NIC pairs via crossover cable I got my 200 mBit/s
> total.
> As I understand it a switch should let any two connected computers talk
> at maximum speed so what I observed seems fishy.
>
> I didn't have time to test other switches yet (I also have a 3COM switch
> available).  Maybe I just don't understand how switches work :)
>
> Ferdinand
> --
> Ferdinand Schmid
> Architectural Energy Corporation
> Celebrating 20 Years of Improving Building Energy Performance
> http://www.archenergy.com
> _______________________________________________
> Web Page:  http://lug.boulder.co.us
> Mailing List: http://lists.lug.boulder.co.us/mailman/listinfo/lug
> Join us on IRC: lug.boulder.co.us port=6667 channel=#colug