+ Post New Thread
Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 95
Wireless Networks Thread, Topologies/Switch Throughput in Technical; ...
  1. #46

    synaesthesia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Northamptonshire
    Posts
    5,948
    Thank Post
    583
    Thanked 1,018 Times in 784 Posts
    Blog Entries
    15
    Rep Power
    464
    We are not spending any money on W7 upgrades - we have an EES agreement which takes care of all of that. Only physical upgrades may be RAM and the £200 or so that would cost will make no difference to the core!

  2. #47


    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    8,202
    Thank Post
    442
    Thanked 1,032 Times in 812 Posts
    Rep Power
    339
    Quote Originally Posted by synaesthesia View Post
    We are not spending any money on W7 upgrades - we have an EES agreement which takes care of all of that. Only physical upgrades may be RAM and the £200 or so that would cost will make no difference to the core!
    Your EES is free? They charged us more for EES than perpetual licensing!!! We've been running XP from 2003 to 2010 like you, and I dare say the savings on MS are what bought us a decent netwok.

  3. #48

    synaesthesia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Northamptonshire
    Posts
    5,948
    Thank Post
    583
    Thanked 1,018 Times in 784 Posts
    Blog Entries
    15
    Rep Power
    464
    Obviously it's not free - it's already in place. It is FAR less than the alternatives/perpetual licensing especially when you factor in server and CAL.

    Anyway, rather off topic. Learned yesterday about the marketing bullsh** that is "Mac Table Size" and that 8000 Entries does not, as logic dictates, mean 8000 Mac addresses in the table. It means 8000 bytes of mac addresses, so thats about 512 MACs. And then it's marketed even more, hard drive like, and rounded down to 500 MACs. We certainly have over that amount, and on a flat network, we are effectively flooding the MAC tables which in turn stops routing working properly, turning the switches into hubs.
    That and another failed procurve *shakes fist* - we're on our way. New switches being ordered but in the meantime we're looking to learn about v-lans damned quick!

  4. #49


    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    8,202
    Thank Post
    442
    Thanked 1,032 Times in 812 Posts
    Rep Power
    339
    I've enclosed our VLAN topology design for reference.
    Attached Files Attached Files

  5. Thanks to CyberNerd from:

    synaesthesia (24th November 2011)

  6. #50

    SYNACK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    11,143
    Thank Post
    863
    Thanked 2,695 Times in 2,285 Posts
    Blog Entries
    9
    Rep Power
    772
    HP did have some of its lowest end switches made by other verdors and rebranded before the 3com buyout so it is still a possibility. You are right that VLANS should help if your hitting MAC table limits and propper use of STP (full on uplink ports) portfast/RSTP on desktop links will also help, you also need to make sure that the core is elected the master bridge woich you should be able to do by setting it bridge priority high and making sure it is turned on first.

    It does sound like you are making progres as to the causes of your slowdowns though which is good as you are now able to implement ways to mitigate them.

    Cybernerd please keep your ludditrey to yourself, not everyone is happy running a ten year old OS with limitid support and lesser security. Windows has moved on and so have many users. This is not the topic of this thread either and distracts from the problem at hand (no its not Windows 7).
    Last edited by SYNACK; 24th November 2011 at 04:40 PM.

  7. #51

    SYNACK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    11,143
    Thank Post
    863
    Thanked 2,695 Times in 2,285 Posts
    Blog Entries
    9
    Rep Power
    772
    Synaesthesia what are you going to use for routing between the VLANS as you'll need a layer 3 device to route between the subnets. You may be able to use a server with a bunch of NICs but that is going to have huge latency compared to a dedicated layer 3 switch (not sure if you have one floating around there).

  8. #52

    synaesthesia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Northamptonshire
    Posts
    5,948
    Thank Post
    583
    Thanked 1,018 Times in 784 Posts
    Blog Entries
    15
    Rep Power
    464
    Cheers CyberNerd.

    Was setting up 3 switches today with a "core" (a 48 port 3com 4500) so I could experiment with Vlans so we know what we're talking about before we dive in!
    Couldn't find the IP address so looked at DHCP leases on the server. Oddly enough we found a DHCP entry with no name. Pinged... interesting. Went to its web address. HP ProCurve 2626. Ugh! So where the hell is it? Half an hour later we tracked it down to serving a staffroom and a few more machines. 100MB switch. Can't have been helping so that's being pulled.
    Another procurve failed too, but HP thankfully are damn good with swapping so a new one is on the way.
    Think we'll be plumping for the HP V1910-48G to bolster the core - it certainly has to be an improvement!

  9. #53


    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    8,202
    Thank Post
    442
    Thanked 1,032 Times in 812 Posts
    Rep Power
    339
    Quote Originally Posted by SYNACK View Post
    Cybernerd please keep your ludditrey to yourself, not everyone is happy running a ten year old OS with limitid support and lesser security. Windows has moved on and so have many users. This is not the topic of this thread either and distracts from the problem at hand (no its not Windows 7).
    And keep your fanboism to yourself- XP has been updated regularly since its release 10 yrs ago, SP3 is barely 4yrs old, and there are free modern operating systems that don't drain money. It seems ridiculous spending money on pc's and operating systems without spending anything on an infrastructure to run it on.

  10. #54

    SYNACK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    11,143
    Thank Post
    863
    Thanked 2,695 Times in 2,285 Posts
    Blog Entries
    9
    Rep Power
    772
    Quote Originally Posted by CyberNerd View Post
    And keep your fanboism to yourself- XP has been updated regularly since its release 10 yrs ago, SP3 is barely 4yrs old, and there are free modern operating systems that don't drain money. It seems ridiculous spending money on pc's and operating systems without spending anything on an infrastructure to run it on.
    Look, lets take this to PM if we must and keep it out of the OPs thread. The primary code base is older than 4 years, its just had updates tacked on top rather than having things reimplimented you hate Windows (7) we get it. Linux vs Windows is a seporate matter all together and will just trash the rest of this thread which is unfair to the OP.



    Synaesthesia - that V series switch does look to have limited layer 3 ability so should be able to route between VLANs. You'll want to slice up your network into subnets so that it can be routed as just putting the same client range accross multiple VLANs will break connectivity. The subnets are the structure that allow communication between sections.

    For DHCP you can look into DHCP helper on the core switch which takes DHCP requests from the different segments and fowards them to your server on whatever segment it may be on.

  11. Thanks to SYNACK from:

    synaesthesia (24th November 2011)

  12. #55

    synaesthesia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Northamptonshire
    Posts
    5,948
    Thank Post
    583
    Thanked 1,018 Times in 784 Posts
    Blog Entries
    15
    Rep Power
    464
    Cheers, I've also been looking at those features but have avoided playing with anything unnecessarily.

    My quick tuppence on the XP vs 7 is a simple one. If there's any modern system (post Core2Duo era) that runs better on XP than on 7 then it's severely broken.

  13. #56


    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    3,411
    Thank Post
    184
    Thanked 356 Times in 285 Posts
    Rep Power
    148
    Quote Originally Posted by SYNACK View Post
    HP did have some of its lowest end switches made by other verdors and rebranded before the 3com buyout so it is still a possibility
    I can confirm that (atleast some of) the V series is simply rebadged 3com kit. We have a 5 port HP switch which is exactly the same as the 3com one we bought, both at around the time of the merger.

  14. #57


    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    8,202
    Thank Post
    442
    Thanked 1,032 Times in 812 Posts
    Rep Power
    339
    Quote Originally Posted by synaesthesia View Post
    My quick tuppence on the XP vs 7 is a simple one. If there's any modern system (post Core2Duo era) that runs better on XP than on 7 then it's severely broken.
    The point I keep trying to make is that you shouldn't be running Core2Due era PC's using gigabit NIC's on the network that you have. The problem here is that older PC's won't be able to use their gigabit NIC's because the processor won't keep up. On faster machines you'll just end up flooding the uplinks, it will get worse as you put in faster and faster machines.

    Quote Originally Posted by SYNACK View Post
    The primary code base is older than 4 years, its just had updates tacked on top rather than having things reimplimented you hate Windows (7) we get it.
    Don't put words in my mouth. I just say it's a waste of money to buy an EES agreement and expect to run regular updates if synaesthesia can't afford a network. I'm suggesting ways to save money and do it properly.
    If it comes down to money the infrastructure needs to be in place before the bells and whistles.

  15. #58

    SYNACK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    11,143
    Thank Post
    863
    Thanked 2,695 Times in 2,285 Posts
    Blog Entries
    9
    Rep Power
    772
    Quote Originally Posted by j17sparky View Post
    I can confirm that (atleast some of) the V series is simply rebadged 3com kit. We have a 5 port HP switch which is exactly the same as the 3com one we bought, both at around the time of the merger.
    Yes, that one is rebadged 3Com, I was reffering to the bunch of Procurves that he had issues with before, if they were from the bottom segment then even before hp's purchase of 3Com I am pretty sure that some of those were made by different vendors and rebadged.

    The 3Com stuff should be alright, I was not to happy about how the company itself handled itself but their hardware was usually fine and now they have corporate oversite from a different company. There again hp is not exactly run by champions at the moment (WebOS saga) but hopefully with the sacking of yet another CEO they will get back on track. Even with all this their network gear has always seemed really solid and well featured which is why we stick with them.

  16. #59

    SYNACK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    11,143
    Thank Post
    863
    Thanked 2,695 Times in 2,285 Posts
    Blog Entries
    9
    Rep Power
    772
    Quote Originally Posted by CyberNerd View Post
    The point I keep trying to make is that you shouldn't be running Core2Due era PC's using gigabit NIC's on the network that you have. The problem here is that older PC's won't be able to use their gigabit NIC's because the processor won't keep up. On faster machines you'll just end up flooding the uplinks, it will get worse as you put in faster and faster machines.



    Don't put words in my mouth. I just say it's a waste of money to buy an EES agreement and expect to run regular updates if synaesthesia can't afford a network. I'm suggesting ways to save money and do it properly.
    If it comes down to money the infrastructure needs to be in place before the bells and whistles.
    Horse leavings, 'you should not be running gigabit as you won't get the whole gigabit out of it', that may be so but you still get at least 300mbit/s out of it, a three times speed increase for $10 more hardware. Also what about things like imaging over multicast where the other links are not as much of a concern, taking one sixth the time to image something has got to be worth something. Also you should at least have the ability to step up to the higher speeds if required, I get so sick of some people who insist on getting 10/100 gear as 'its all you'll ever need/can use' then being subjected to the slowdowns that it causes. Why must some people avoid new technology at all costs no matter what the benifit.

    As to upgrades, at a certain point it is no longer even worth having the infrastructure if your network is that old and cack that nonone wants to use it or needs a training manual from musem archives to be able to understand it. User experience and familiarity matters to but we're drifting off topic again.

    The network loading caused by gigabit to the edge all depends on the usage patterns of the systems and the users, in many situations those pipes are not saturated as things get done quicker so that load disapates quicker too. There may be issues in certain deployments but that is something that can be dealt with with QoS and further tweaks/upgrades later. 100mbit to the desktop is not the answer, it is deffereing the problem and having gig ability gives you that much more flexibility in how you distribute the bandwidth if you need to.
    Last edited by SYNACK; 24th November 2011 at 06:57 PM.

  17. #60
    ChrisH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    East Lancs
    Posts
    5,002
    Thank Post
    120
    Thanked 282 Times in 260 Posts
    Rep Power
    108
    What are the hp port fast commands does anyone have an example? All solutions on google always end up talking about the cisco commands.

SHARE:
+ Post New Thread
Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Switch topology
    By Craggus2000 in forum Wireless Networks
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11th June 2009, 10:23 PM
  2. New fiber backbone and switches brainstorm with me!!!
    By ChrisH in forum Wireless Networks
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 16th January 2006, 11:04 AM
  3. Selling Switches
    By MuppetQueen in forum Hardware
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 17th November 2005, 05:42 PM
  4. gb managed switches
    By russdev in forum Hardware
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 15th November 2005, 02:16 PM
  5. New switch - 98 no longer connects
    By mark in forum Wireless Networks
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 12th November 2005, 02:58 AM

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Posting Permissions

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