Re: SQL and RadiusNT

Dale E. Reed Jr. ( (no email) )
Fri, 18 Apr 1997 13:22:46 -0700

Mitch Wagers wrote:
> That's what I said, there is no great improvement to a 100mbps HUB, it is
> better to go with a switch on the front end. 10mbps SWITCHES that support
> more than 8 MAC addresses are expensive, and if the switch can't handle the
> total number of MAC addresses connected to each port, then it is a waste of
> time and money. I'm not arguing with anyone, just stating a good way to
> improve the speed, not the cheapest :)

Most decent "modern" Etherswitches handles 1024 mac addresses per port.
We use Cisco Catalyst (yes, on the high end) and they rock.

> This is where we differ, overkill in my opinion keeps everyone happy as a
> customer...underkill only causes problems :) Some people disagree, some
> don't!

I tend to shoot for the middle. I never recommend something I don't
the user can grow from. If an ISP is big enough to require Switched
100mbp for their layout, they definately better have the technical
expertise to know what they are doing. I don't know of any ISPs
RadiusNT/Emerald which need that kind of backbone layout who don't have
the in-house expertise.

> I'll no longer send this mail to this list, sorry...

Network issuses are actually an interesting part of RadiusNT, since
itself is time based. I don't mind a little of the discussin, since we
talked about remote pops and such in a similar scenario before.

-- Dale E. Reed Jr.  (       IEA Software, Inc.      |  RadiusNT, Emerald, and NT FAQs Internet Solutions for Today  |