• Subject: Re: Errors on Token Ring line
  • From: dhandy@xxxxxxxxxxx (Douglas Handy)
  • Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2000 23:48:12 -0500

Ray,

>I think the difference you are seeing is probably just based on the way things 
>are
>actually cabled to the MSAU.  

As Larry pointed out, I don't think it makes much difference on my
size network.  As a quick test though, I dropped it down to just two
devices on the ring.  The change was insignificant, about 0.05K/sec.
And I still had the same disparity based on direction of data flow.

>dumping token ring, you now often find them on EBAY for $100 or less!  And it 
>will
>make those transfers faster!

Actually, that is why I'm now running token ring.  I got my (passive)
MAU for $5, and my PCI adapters for $3.  The 2619 card for the 400 was
likewise very cheap on eBay.

I can get much better rates using this setup then the ethernet adapter
in my FSIOP, and it cost next to nothing.

I did this as an experiment because I wanted a client of mine to add a
network adapter to their CISC machine.  But even used ethernet
adapters are fairly expensive for it.  Their hardware service provider
literally gave them two TR adapters for their 400 free, and I got them
the rack-mount MAU's for $5 each and PCI adapters for $1 each.  For
the grand sum of $50, I was able to switch about 40 PC's from using
twinax and netsoft router to TCP/IP and CA Express.  (They were
already cabled with CAT5 to each twinax card.)

Guess which they like better? <g>

I wouldn't normally pick TR now, except at those prices it is *really*
hard to cost justify 100M ethernet instead.  Besides, I'm not even
sure a 100M card is available for their CISC machine.  I'm hoping to
get them into a RISC box within a year, and then we'll look at moving
to ethernet.  Who cares if we throw out $50 spent on cards now?  But
it may be equally hard to justify ethernet then, with TR being
essentially free.

They hadn't wanted to spend the money for an ethernet card for their
CISC box, knowing its days were numbered.  But it was pretty easy to
get them to spend $50 to get on a network now.

>The switch will allow you full duplex on adapters which support that. 

My 400 adapter does support full duplex, as do my PC adapters.  But I
have it set to half duplex, because my understanding was that to use
full duplex you needed just two devices on the ring or a switch like
you mentioned.  I'm not sure if that is right or not, but regardless I
don't think it would buy me much since I typically wouldn't have large
transfers going in both directions concurrently.

If full duplex helps eliminate line turn-around time, then maybe it
would help.  Maybe I'll try some experiments someday, but my gut
feeling is that in my environment it won't buy me much.

Doug
+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---

This thread ...

Follow-Ups:
Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2019 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].