Re: Good design for LAN

From: Larry Letterman (lletterm@cisco.com)
Date: Wed Mar 12 2003 - 06:01:10 GMT-3


If the users are on switches, there should not be any collisions,
unless there are speed/duplex issues..

If the users are on hubs, then its a mute point...

Larry Letterman
Network Engineer
Cisco Systems

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Angelo De Guzman
  To: Brian Dennis ; ccielab@groupstudy.com
  Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 11:49 PM
  Subject: RE: Good design for LAN

  Hi,
    I have about 310 users on my LAN. Since I will be
  implementing DHCP anyway, I wanted to separate them
  into 2 /24 network. A /23 will definitely cater for
  the 310 users. Two stations transmitting at the same
  time is what I meant. The more users the more chances
  that a collision can occur. Is this right?
  Thans Again,
  Angelo

  --- Brian Dennis <brian@labforge.com> wrote:
> Since we don't know how many IP addresses you need
> per subnet it's hard
> for anyone to accurately say if a /23 is better or a
> /24 is better. Also
> can you elaborate on your "ideas" about "collisions"
> on the 6500?
>
> Brian Dennis, CCIE #2210 (R&S/ISP Dial/Security)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com
> [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> Angelo De Guzman
> Sent: Monday, March 03, 2003 9:18 PM
> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Good design for LAN
>
> To All,
> I have many VLANS on my 6500 switch. I wanted to
> simplify my network numbering. Which is better for a
> LAN set-up, /23 or /24? I wanted to know what will
> be
> the disadvantage of using each. I have some ideas
> (collision, broadcast, etc.) but I wanted to know
> more.
> Thanks In Advance,
> Angelo De Guzman
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
> http://taxes.yahoo.com/

  __________________________________________________
  Do you Yahoo!?
  Yahoo! Web Hosting - establish your business online
  http://webhosting.yahoo.com



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 05 2003 - 08:51:38 GMT-3