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
think
the user can grow from. If an ISP is big enough to require Switched
100mbp for their layout, they definately better have the technical
in-house
expertise to know what they are doing. I don't know of any ISPs
implementing
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
RADIUS
itself is time based. I don't mind a little of the discussin, since we
have
talked about remote pops and such in a similar scenario before.

-- Dale E. Reed Jr.  (daler@iea.com)_________________________________________________________________       IEA Software, Inc.      |  RadiusNT, Emerald, and NT FAQs Internet Solutions for Today  |    http://www.emerald.iea.com