+ Post New Thread
Results 1 to 9 of 9
Wired Networks Thread, 1GB clients and 1GB uplinks in Technical; Hello everyone, I am currently experiencing some brain fog! My question is that our school network consists of mostly all ...
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    110
    Thank Post
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    Rep Power
    0

    Question 1GB clients and 1GB uplinks

    Hello everyone,

    I am currently experiencing some brain fog! My question is that our school network consists of mostly all Gigabit switches, which provide gigabit links to all client devices with gigabit links between switches. Our core also, operates at 1 gigabit.

    My question is that surely there is some performance issues having all our clients connect to the network at 1Gb. I was thinking, would it be worthwhile making all of the client connections run at 100Mb with the uplinks and core still running at 1Gb.

    Would this be better with regards ensuring that the uplinks and core are not overloaded by a few machines thrashing the 1Gb connection?

    I hope the above makes sense.

    J. Worth.

  2. #2
    FishCustard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Croydon
    Posts
    421
    Thank Post
    72
    Thanked 41 Times in 37 Posts
    Rep Power
    19
    You are quite correct - it's best practice to have the edge links at least 1 'step' below the trunk links. That way, as you say, one person trying to save 30 GB of MP3s to their user area won't clog the link with 1 Gbps of traffic, the maximum they'd be able to hit is 100 Mbps, leaving plenty of bandwidth available for other users.

  3. #3

    FN-GM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    15,957
    Thank Post
    886
    Thanked 1,700 Times in 1,477 Posts
    Blog Entries
    12
    Rep Power
    448
    I think you can use QOS to make sure that users don't hog all the bandwidth on the link.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Lincolnshire
    Posts
    2,196
    Thank Post
    13
    Thanked 228 Times in 217 Posts
    Rep Power
    67
    Or upgrade your backbone to 10Gb!

  5. #5
    FishCustard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Croydon
    Posts
    421
    Thank Post
    72
    Thanked 41 Times in 37 Posts
    Rep Power
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by FN-GM View Post
    I think you can use QOS to make sure that users don't hog all the bandwidth on the link.
    Isn't that for prioritising certain types of traffic/packet sizes (e.g. VoIP traffic, which will be composed of smaller TCP packets), rather than limiting bandwidth? (honestly not sure!)

  6. #6


    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    8,202
    Thank Post
    442
    Thanked 1,032 Times in 812 Posts
    Rep Power
    339
    I would also agree that the core should operate at speeds an order of magnitude above the clients.
    I've been berated by others for suggesting this before on this forum so I understand that it is common for schools to install 1GB/s on clients without updating their servers. In my mind it stands to reason that clients should be restricted and I only started to upgrade clients to 1GB/s after I had upgraded the servers to and the main core uplinks.

  7. #7

    m25man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Romford, Essex
    Posts
    1,626
    Thank Post
    49
    Thanked 460 Times in 336 Posts
    Rep Power
    140
    A problem solved by using trunks or link aggregation.
    If you we're to experience a single client utilising an entire gigabit uplink the trunk will kick in.
    Regardless, do any of us actually have any file/disk or resource arrays capable of saturating a 1GB uplink?
    I can't think of many. Normally my disk I/O bottlenecks before the LAN does?

  8. #8

    Geoff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Fylde, Lancs, UK.
    Posts
    11,804
    Thank Post
    110
    Thanked 583 Times in 504 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    224
    One aspect of 'fully blown' QoS is traffic shaping. i.e. you restrict the bandwidth available to some traffic types so you can guarantee a certain level of service to others. This is above and beyond want most standard switches are capable of doing, as they only offer the ability to prioritise traffic. However in a LAN environment this generally isn't a concern (as opposed to a WAN/Internet gateway where it's always a foremost concern) because upgrading the capacity of your core links is (relatively) cheap. So as other have said as you should be looking at having a 10Gbit core if you are insisting on 1Gbit to the desktop. If you baulk at the costs of this, you might want to look at seeing where you actually need 1Gbit to the desktop and prioritising upgrades there first.

  9. #9


    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    8,202
    Thank Post
    442
    Thanked 1,032 Times in 812 Posts
    Rep Power
    339
    Quote Originally Posted by m25man View Post
    Normally my disk I/O bottlenecks before the LAN does?
    What are you using on your servers, parallel ATA? Modern SAS drives run at 3 or 6 Gbit/s without any network overhead.

SHARE:
+ Post New Thread

Similar Threads

  1. What's with the netbooks all having 1GB ram and windows starter
    By duxbuz in forum Netbooks, PDA and Phones
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 6th February 2012, 04:19 PM
  2. Citrix Client and PCLinux 2007
    By tickmike in forum *nix
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 10th February 2008, 01:00 AM
  3. Citrix PS 4.0 thin clients and printers
    By triggmiester in forum Thin Client and Virtual Machines
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11th July 2007, 03:26 PM
  4. Thin Clients and Streaming Media
    By jwheelhouse in forum Thin Client and Virtual Machines
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 3rd July 2007, 08:15 PM
  5. Thin Clients and wireless
    By wesleyw in forum Thin Client and Virtual Machines
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 26th February 2007, 04:08 PM

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •