ethernet and switches, was Re: [rescue] Mozilla Firefox

[ed at the7thbeer.com]

> >> I think you just answered your own question.  Long live FDDI!
> >
> > I don't think FDDI is a panacae either.
>
>    There is no panacea.  No networking technology is perfect for every
> application.

*looks up avian carrier RFC, puts under Dave's nose.*

HA! ;)

>    In what marketplace?  It was the mainstay of core networking for a
> long time.  Cisco specifically steered people away from FDDI for what
> seemed to be political reasons, and since (like it or not) Cisco gear
> is the mainstay of core networking, they successfully tanked FDDI.  At
> least, for what people are purchasing new equipment to build.  FDDI
> still moves packets just fine, regardless of what some company's sales
> droids would rather sell you.

FDDI Fucking Works.  And it works well, IMHO, to boot.  I think Cisco
killed FDDI because ethernet was just 'too comfortable' to most PHB's that
had their hands on the piggy bank.  Too bad. :(

> > I don't think ethernet is near as bad as its opponents say it is.
>
>    BZZZT.  We can go into details if you like.  I'm not sure you want to
> go down that road tonight, though, because I'm in a really special
> mood.

I'm just sorta curious why you dislike ethernet so much.  Personally, I
think it was a good idea at the time.  But it never scaled well and really
after some of the hassles I had to deal with at work this week, I'm pretty
much convinced it will never scale well.  But ubiquity counts, I guess.

> >   Most of them say it cannot do things it does daily.
>
>    Well *I* certainly haven't said that.  It does move data.  For that
> matter, so does Windows...and like Ethernet, it doesn't do it very
> well.



-ed
-----------------
ed at the7thbeer.com