|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Testing procedures for new network implementation?
No Rafi, I'm not "confused", I replied recounting what my organization deployed as a replacement for the hardware which Wayne is currently working on. Please refrain from further ad-hominem personal attacks in violation of this forum's charter. Just because different list participants have different approaches for solving a particular problem doesn't mean one is necessarily "wrong", and needs to be lambasted. This is what makes NANOG so diverse and great, like this country of ours. ---Rico, who is putting "NA" back in "NANOG" On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 18:13:37 +0300 (IDT), Rafi Sadowsky <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Rick > > You seem slightly confused: > > All the URLs you sent are for 10/100 ethernet switches/hubs > (I inserted the relevant title below each url ) > > -- > Rafi > > ## On 2004-08-11 10:39 -0400 Ricardo "Rick" Gonzalez typed: > > R"G> > R"G> Wayne, > R"G> > R"G> My organization has recently switched from a similar infrastructure to > R"G> the following: > R"G> > R"G> Core: http://www.svec.com/PRODUCTS/fd800ds/FD800DS2.htm > FD800DS 8-port Dual Speed Hub > > R"G> Distribution layer: http://www.svec.com/Products/FD521EDS.HTM > FD521 5-port Fast Ethernet Switch > > R"G> Wire closet: http://www.svec.com/Products/fd510eds.htm > FD510 5-Port Fast Ethernet Hub > > R"G> > R"G> We have seen a noticeable increase in performance, ROI, and > R"G> manageability following the migration away from the prior 3Com > R"G> solution. If you have any implementation-specific questions, please > R"G> mail me off list and I'll do my best to answer them. > R"G> > R"G> With regards, > R"G> ---Rico > R"G> > >
|