RE: Etherchannel

From: Mark Lewis (markl11@xxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Tue Oct 10 2000 - 19:14:24 GMT-3

• Next message: Simon Baxter: "RE: DLSW prioritzation - Results"
• Previous message: Bob Harrison: "Terminal Servers?"
• Maybe in reply to: Simon Hopkins: "Etherchannel"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

Sorry dude, you're in the minority(No, we're not talking E1s here!) (check
your Cisco doc.s/ CCIE Prof.Dev. 'Cisco LAN Switching'), '..up to 8
Gbps(16Gbps full-duplex)' (a quote).

Tut, tut.....

Mark
CCIE#6280

>From: "Asbjorn Hojmark" <Asbjorn@Hojmark.ORG>
>To: "'Mark Lewis'" <markl11@hotmail.com>
>CC: <simon@muddypaws.net>, <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
>Subject: RE: Etherchannel
>Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 22:30:21 +0200
>
> > On the 6000s it's up to 8 ports, giving a max of 16Gbps
> > full-duplex.
>
>Or rather, 8 Gbps full duplex. Nobody calls an E1 '4 Mbps
>full duplex'. (Except maybe marketing, but this is a tech
>list).
>
>...
>
>Ahem. Ups. Sorry. You just pushed that button.
>
>-A
>--
>Heroes: Vint Cerf & Bob Kahn, Leonard Kleinrock, Robert Metcalfe
>Links : http://www.hojmark.org/networking/
>
>

• Next message: Simon Baxter: "RE: DLSW prioritzation - Results"
• Previous message: Bob Harrison: "Terminal Servers?"
• Maybe in reply to: Simon Hopkins: "Etherchannel"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 08:25:25 GMT-3