[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference netcad::hub_mgnt

Title:DEChub/HUBwatch/PROBEwatch CONFERENCE
Notice:Firmware -2, Doc -3, Power -4, HW kits -5, firm load -6&7
Moderator:NETCAD::COLELLADT
Created:Wed Nov 13 1991
Last Modified:Fri Jun 06 1997
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:4455
Total number of notes:16761

2529.0. "which is the best config?" by DAIVC::IVAN () Mon Jul 17 1995 09:36

Dear All,

Our customer have a network with 120+ workstations and servers.
Currently they have 3 Netware, 1 Pathworks server and 1 Alpha 2100.
All of the servers and workstations are in one shared Ethernet.
Lately, they experienced network slow-down and asked us to
propose a new network configuration utilizing existing devices.
We haven't investigated the problems yet (we are preparing
the tools to probe the network though), but we will go with
FDDI and switched Ethernet. Our considerations are: put high
bandwidth backbone for future development and partition the network
to isolate the traffic. We will put DECswitch 900EFs in our design
and utilize the existing DECrepeater 900TMs.

What I want to know is:
Which is the best between these two configurations
(we make a FDDI ring using DECswitch 900EF ports, connecting
 an Alpha Server 2100 & we will put all devices in Hub 900)

Config-1
========

         +----------+ 
  +------| DR 900TM |-------- to SQL server, Keyfile svr & up to 29 WS
  |      +----------+
+---+
|   |    +----------+
| D |----| DR 900TM |-------- to 2 DS 90FL, Fax Server (PC) & up to 29 WS 
| S |    +----------+
| W |    +----------+
| 9 |----| DR 900TM |-------- to 2 Netware Servers & up to 30 WS
| 0 |    +----------+
| 0 |    +----------+
| E |----| DR 900TM |-------- to 1 Netware Servers & up to 31 WS
| F |    +----------+
+---+
  |      +----------+
  +------| DR 900TM |-------- to VAX 4000 & up to 31 WS
         +----------+

Config-2
========

+---+
| 2 |---- to SQL server
|   |---- to Keyfile server
| D |---- to Netware server 
| S |---- to Netware server
| W |---- to Netware server
| 9 |---- to VAX 4000
| 0 |    +----------+
| 0 |----| DR 900TM |-------- to 2 DS 90L, Fax Server & up to 29 WS
| E |    +----------+
|   |    +------------+
|   |----| 2 DR 900TM |-------- up to 64 WS
|   |    +------------+
|   |    +------------+
|   |----| 2 DR 900TM |-------- up to 64 WS
|   |    +------------+
+---+
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
2529.1NETCAD::ANILTue Jul 18 1995 21:1711
    Nowadays people tend to put servers directly on the FDDI backbone
    and clients hang off Ethernet ports on switches connected into the
    backbone.  It seems like you want to keep servers on Ethernets; in
    that case, I would put each frequently-used server on a separate Ethernet,
    and small client groups on separate Ethernets, interconnected across
    an FDDI backbone.  In other words, your "config 2" with 2 switches is
    more along the right lines, except that 64 clients on a single Ethernet
    may be too many.  With 2 EF switches you get 12 Ethernet ports connected
    into an FDDI so you should be able to create smaller groups.
    
    Anil
2529.2Config #1 MAY be betterDELNI::PIEPERThu Jul 20 1995 13:4233
Configuration #1 COULD BE a better solution depending upon what versions
of NetWare the customer is running and traffic flow and server locations.

Note 2497.2 points out that Novell IPX is a Request-Response protocol
where EACH request must be explicitly acknowledged.  This request-response
per packet sees a 2x delay when going through a store and forward bridge.
First the originator station sends the complete packet to the bridge, then 
the bridge resends the complete packet to the destination.  The destination 
station then acknowledges the packet by a return packet to the bridge.  After 
the bridge receives the complete packet, it then transmits the acknowledgement 
packet to the originator.  Compare this to both server and client being on a
single Ethernet where the originator station sends a packet to the destination
and the destination station sends an acknowledgement back to the originator.
This is why many customers that insert a bridge into a Novell environment
typically complain about "slower performance".  Most other protocols do not
have this problem since they can transmit complete trains of packets without
receiving an acknowledgement.

If the customer has implemented the new "packet burst" feature in Netware
(see Note #2497.3) which allows a train of packets to be sent before expecting
an acknowledgement, configuration #2 may be OK.  But without this feature,
configuration #1 might be better especially if:

	1) Servers are physically colocated with clients
	2) Specific clients NORMALLY link to specific servers
	3) A traffic analysis has been done so you know how to group the 
	   top talkers together

Basically with this knowledge, you can establish multiple collision domains
where each domain is a server with its primary clients.  The FDDI could be
used for servers that are "common" to all users but not a primary server.
And everything can be interconnected via the switch.