3 ms·
-
by t312227 5mo ago
-
- oliwarner 5mo agoIs that really true? If so, is there a saner way to handle this than upgrade all the things to 10GBE? Like a POE ethernet condom that interfaces with both network and devices at native max speeds without the core network having to degrade?
- eqvinox 5mo ago> Is that really true? It's not, cf. sibling posts. The GP probably learned networking in the 80ies~90ies when it was true, but those times are long gone. (unless you're talking wifi.)
- HHad3 5mo agoThat is complete nonsense and not how switched networks work.
- the_mitsuhiko 5mo agoThat hasn't been true on switched networks in probably 20 years or so.
- vardump 5mo agoWe have switches now, hubs just don't exist anymore. Switches are not affected by some devices having a lower speed.
- hnlmorg 5mo agoIsn’t that only relevant for network topologies that rely heavily on broadcasting to multiple nodes. Eg token ring, WiFi and powerline adapters? For regular Ethernet, the switch will have a table of which IPs are on which NIC and thus can dynamically send packets at the right transmission protocols supported by those NICs without degrading the service of other NICs.
- hdgvhicv 5mo agoI’ve seen some vlans hit 1mbit BUM filters, I think we had about 800 users on that one. To saturate a 10m link would require a help of a lot of broadcast traffic. 100m is fine. 10m is fine but I can’t think of anything that negotiates 10m other than maybe WOL (I don’t use it enough to be sure from memory). If I didn ahve something esoteric it would be on a specialised vlan anyway.
- namibj 5mo ago10m is extended reach copper, you can do about triple the range of 100m with approximately the same transceiver analog prowess.