[Bulk] Re: [K12OSN] OT: parallel running cat5e to switches
"Terrell Prudé Jr."
microman at cmosnetworks.com
Mon Feb 23 04:56:10 UTC 2009
Typically, unmanaged switches don't even support STP. This is because
STP allows you to change some of the parameters--Fast Learning /
PortFast, whether you're running "traditional" STP or "rapid" STP, and
so on. What would very likely happen is a loop...which would bring down
that entire bridged segment.
You really need managed switches to do this.
Have you done a bandwidth analysis to see just where your bottleneck is?
Do you GNU <http://www.gnu.org>?
Microsoft Free since 2003 <http://www.cmosnetworks.com>--the ultimate
Cory Cartwright wrote:
> I apologize if you have already gotten or know the answer. You are
> talking about an ether channel and I don't believe an unmanaged switch
> would support that. What it would probably support is a (STP) spanning
> tree protocol. With STP one link would would be placed in a blocking
> state while the other in a forwarding state, this provides redundancy
> but not increased bandwidth.
> On Sun, 2009-02-22 at 13:51 -0600, Barry R Cisna wrote:
>> Hello List,
>> I forgot to mention in my initial post,that these switches are unmanaged
>> switches. AKA plug'n play. 26port 24-10/100 + two GIGE uplink. I am
>> guessing I am SOL seeing how these can not be 'multilinked'?
>> Maybe time for some new managed switches,ay.
>> Thanks for the suggestions everyone.
>> K12OSN mailing list
>> K12OSN at redhat.com
>> For more info see <http://www.k12os.org>
> K12OSN mailing list
> K12OSN at redhat.com
> For more info see <http://www.k12os.org>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the K12OSN