Brian Raffety
Registered
I'm considering a gigabit upgrade for our LAN. Most of our computers are newer G4 Powermacs with built-in gigabit Ethernet, and I've seen "new" ethernt gigabit switches from 3COM (SUPERSTACK_3 10/100/1000 6Port Switch 3C16468-US) for about $415.
This would put 5 of our computers on a gigibit network. I'd set this portion of our LAN in a star configuration with the Superstack in the center, and one of the ports would connect to our server.
The main reason for doing this is to keep expensive but seldom used software on the server. I'm hoping that the gigibit connection is fast enough to let us mount server vols on the client G4s and run applications that reside on the server. That way we can stay in software use compliance and reduce our investment in specialty software (e.g. statistical applications).
Also, for the gigibit users, file transfer should be faster, making it easier to back-up to the server. And all users should benefit from the server being on a gigibit connection in that when multiple 10/100 users try to access the server at one time, the wider bandwidth should be able to accommodate them as if they were the only clients knocking on the server's door (or at least it should be a good step in this direction).
But I have a few questions...
1) Several MacWorld articles from 2000 talk about gigabit Ethernet only being about twice as fast as 10/100 because the Mac CPUs are too slow to handle the protocol, and that the Mac OS doesn't support the extended packet size for gigabit Ethernet. Is this still true?
2) Is it important to keep the 10/100 machines off the gigabit part of the LAN? Would, for example, putting a 10/100 switch on one of the gigabit ports erode the speed of the other gigabit ports on the switch?
3) Are gigabit LANs more difficult to maintain than 10/100 LANs? Are there any hidden downsides other than cost?
Thanks.
This would put 5 of our computers on a gigibit network. I'd set this portion of our LAN in a star configuration with the Superstack in the center, and one of the ports would connect to our server.
The main reason for doing this is to keep expensive but seldom used software on the server. I'm hoping that the gigibit connection is fast enough to let us mount server vols on the client G4s and run applications that reside on the server. That way we can stay in software use compliance and reduce our investment in specialty software (e.g. statistical applications).
Also, for the gigibit users, file transfer should be faster, making it easier to back-up to the server. And all users should benefit from the server being on a gigibit connection in that when multiple 10/100 users try to access the server at one time, the wider bandwidth should be able to accommodate them as if they were the only clients knocking on the server's door (or at least it should be a good step in this direction).
But I have a few questions...
1) Several MacWorld articles from 2000 talk about gigabit Ethernet only being about twice as fast as 10/100 because the Mac CPUs are too slow to handle the protocol, and that the Mac OS doesn't support the extended packet size for gigabit Ethernet. Is this still true?
2) Is it important to keep the 10/100 machines off the gigabit part of the LAN? Would, for example, putting a 10/100 switch on one of the gigabit ports erode the speed of the other gigabit ports on the switch?
3) Are gigabit LANs more difficult to maintain than 10/100 LANs? Are there any hidden downsides other than cost?
Thanks.