Has anyone used Gigabit cabling
-
I might be wrong then :-O It's just that everywhere I have read about gigabit cabling they say cat-6. - Anders Money talks, but all mine ever says is "Goodbye!"
Anders Molin wrote: I might be wrong then Your not wrong. :) Cat 6 is optimized for hardware requiring Cat 6 over Gig Networks. There are plenty of solutions, many cheaper that can use Cat5e for Gig. The only difference between the two is the shielding between the TX/RX pairs (or quads in this case). Cheers, Frank "Keyboard Error - Press F1 to Continue"
-
Think about things logically (not that you arent already). What are you trying to accomplish? We use a t1 uplink to the net, with a gig backbone across 15 idf's http://wombat.doc.ic.ac.uk/foldoc/foldoc.cgi?query=idf[^] with 100 meg to the desktop. In our scenerio the majority of traffic is intra-network based. File sharing etc. So, the gig helps with overhead. No matter how you slice it, our t1 is routed to our network via a 10 meg link to a 100 meg switch, so the most we will get on the internet is 10 meg. Even if the requests fly there. :) If your goal is to fly with file sharing and LAN stuff, go with the gig. If you just need a link to the internet, a 100 meg switch that auto senses 10 meg connections will not slow you down any. Cheers, Frank "Keyboard Error - Press F1 to Continue"
I guess your reply was ment for me? I use 100mbit to all the desktops, gigabit backbone between the 3 switches (2 x 48 port and 1 x 24 port). Then we get a gigabit link to the fileserver. 100mbit to the firewall, and 100 or 10 mbit to a loadbalancing-box which connects to 4 2048/512 ADSL lines. We do get a lot of trafic on the fileserver, thets why we get the gigabit link to it, bacause all the workstations (gamestations ;) ) is going to save settings and peoples saved games on the fileserver. That might not be that much data, but all the workstations is going to save/load stuff at the same time, every hour on the hour, because people rents a machine for x whole hours. - Anders Money talks, but all mine ever says is "Goodbye!"
-
I guess your reply was ment for me? I use 100mbit to all the desktops, gigabit backbone between the 3 switches (2 x 48 port and 1 x 24 port). Then we get a gigabit link to the fileserver. 100mbit to the firewall, and 100 or 10 mbit to a loadbalancing-box which connects to 4 2048/512 ADSL lines. We do get a lot of trafic on the fileserver, thets why we get the gigabit link to it, bacause all the workstations (gamestations ;) ) is going to save settings and peoples saved games on the fileserver. That might not be that much data, but all the workstations is going to save/load stuff at the same time, every hour on the hour, because people rents a machine for x whole hours. - Anders Money talks, but all mine ever says is "Goodbye!"
Anders Molin wrote: I guess your reply was ment for me? Nah. :) I was trying to give zenboy a real-life example of why one would use gigabit over 100 megabit. Anders Molin wrote: I use 100mbit to all the desktops, gigabit backbone between the 3 switches (2 x 48 port and 1 x 24 port)......etc.....(removed for brevity) Another great example of when to use Gb of Mb. :) Cheers, Frank "Keyboard Error - Press F1 to Continue"
-
According to Firewall.cx[^] It is similar to CAT5 wire, but contains a physical separator between the 4 pairs to further reduce electromagnetic interference.
That was a HUGE post! :laugh:
any idiot can write haiku you just stop at seventeenth syl -ThinkGeek Fortunes
-
That was a HUGE post! :laugh:
any idiot can write haiku you just stop at seventeenth syl -ThinkGeek Fortunes
-
Anders Molin wrote: I guess your reply was ment for me? Nah. :) I was trying to give zenboy a real-life example of why one would use gigabit over 100 megabit. Anders Molin wrote: I use 100mbit to all the desktops, gigabit backbone between the 3 switches (2 x 48 port and 1 x 24 port)......etc.....(removed for brevity) Another great example of when to use Gb of Mb. :) Cheers, Frank "Keyboard Error - Press F1 to Continue"
Actually I have some freaky obsession with hardware. I've got a 3 Gig chip with 2 Gig of Ram now. I have 8 "high-end" machines at my place. I have the luxury of getting hardware cheaper than cost, so I have way to much hardware here (some of you will hate me saying this.) I like horsepower and speed. Most of which gets wasted, since I use one base machine. But, I like new toys and Gigabit seems interesting, especially when I think of transfering 3 or 4 Gig at a time over the network. So it is a practical application for me. I've got 10Mps on my cable-connection to the internet, and its more than I need. But for a fileserver, I'm thinking that any speed increase is nice. I was actually thinking about 2 Gig cards and a crossover cable, with no hub for these two machines. That would increase the speed a little more. I think :confused: :confused: And save a bit of time backing up to the machine I store to. I can get 2 Gig cards for about $60 bucks, so I was curious if anyone was using something like that. I'm gonna think about it. :) -Randy
-
It changed. I was gonna post a page of definitions, then someone reminded me of a web-site. So I apologize
S'alright. I was just giving you a bad time. :)
any idiot can write haiku you just stop at seventeenth syl -ThinkGeek Fortunes
-
Using it work. Just fitted a new rack with new servers and they are all using Gigabit cards with Cat 5e cabling. They are then running via fibre hub connecting the rest of the server racks. :cool:
Nice name... "We will thrive in the new environment, leaping across space and time, everywhere and nowhere, like air or radiation, redundant, self-replicating, and always evolving." -unspecified individual
-
Nice name... "We will thrive in the new environment, leaping across space and time, everywhere and nowhere, like air or radiation, redundant, self-replicating, and always evolving." -unspecified individual
-
Actually I have some freaky obsession with hardware. I've got a 3 Gig chip with 2 Gig of Ram now. I have 8 "high-end" machines at my place. I have the luxury of getting hardware cheaper than cost, so I have way to much hardware here (some of you will hate me saying this.) I like horsepower and speed. Most of which gets wasted, since I use one base machine. But, I like new toys and Gigabit seems interesting, especially when I think of transfering 3 or 4 Gig at a time over the network. So it is a practical application for me. I've got 10Mps on my cable-connection to the internet, and its more than I need. But for a fileserver, I'm thinking that any speed increase is nice. I was actually thinking about 2 Gig cards and a crossover cable, with no hub for these two machines. That would increase the speed a little more. I think :confused: :confused: And save a bit of time backing up to the machine I store to. I can get 2 Gig cards for about $60 bucks, so I was curious if anyone was using something like that. I'm gonna think about it. :) -Randy
zenboy wrote: I was actually thinking about 2 Gig cards and a crossover cable, with no hub for these two machines. That would increase the speed a little more. I think And save a bit of time backing up to the machine I store to. Not really sure what you mean by 2 Gig cards and a crossover cable. But, if your primary purpose is backup, then a single gb card crossed over to a server will allow you to backup that server to a NAS device or SAN. I agree with no hub. Hub's are my nemises. :) I use switches whenever possible, managed when $$ permit. Even still, I think the repeater rule is 2 hubs / switches per interface so thats even tough. (By 2 hubs / switches I mean repeated not uplinked by fiber or other mdx interface). If you can get hdware at such a cheap price, why not invest in a good gb backboned switch. 100 mb to your servers, gb to your backup. :) Cheers, Frank "Keyboard Error - Press F1 to Continue"