T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
740.1 | You'll need 2 DEChub 900s to do this | STRWRS::KOCH_P | It never hurts to ask... | Fri Feb 18 1994 09:35 | 12 |
| I can talk about this with unbridled authority thanks to other notes
who bore with my thickheadedness on understanding these products.
Currently, only SIX (6) flexible channels are available to the
DECrepeater 900FP and DECbridge 900MX. Basically, the hardware in each
of these modules are HARDWIRED to the pins which touch the first SIX
(6) flex channels.
Also, the DECrepeater 900FP has SIX (6) port-pairs which can be
assigned to the SIX (6) flex channels. In order to do what you want,
you'll need TWO (2) DEChub 900 Multiswitch units. Then, you can join
the units together using the front panel FDDI A/B connectors to create
the configuration you want.
|
740.2 | A different view. | CGOS01::DMARLOWE | dsk dsk dsk (tsk tsk tsk) | Fri Feb 18 1994 11:39 | 30 |
| Wade,
I called but you weren't in.
You could get a little wierd (read creative). You could put 2 DB900's
in one DEChub 900. Leave the AUI ports switched to the front panel.
On 1 DB900 switch the 4 UTP to the backplane. On the other DB900
switch 2 UTP to the backplane and either leave the other 2 to the
front panel (or possibly switch 1 to the thinwire). You can still
plug in 2 or more of the DR900FP's into the hub. Take your 6 Ethernet
channels and distribute them across the DR900FP's ie. one or more
fiber pairs get Channel 1. Same for Channel 2 and so on.
You still have 4 AUI's. You could put fiber MAU's on them and patch
them directly into the fiber to each location. Or you can take
the fiber from the MAU and connect into one of the fiber ports on
the DR900FP and create several LANs within the DR900FP that DO NOT
connect to any of the backplane channels. Essentially a self contained
LAN.
The remaining UTP ports on the front panel could be used to connect
servers, etc.
I talked to Daryl Whitlock yesterday and he said that with only
6 Ethernets per hub (and needing 12) it would double your quote.
You still need the same number of DB900's and DR900FP's. What you
only need is twice the number DEChub 900's or am I smoking shredded
gym socks? 8^)
dave
|
740.3 | when is 15 not 15.... | KAOFS::S_HYNDMAN | Acronym Decoder Ring Architect | Mon May 16 1994 12:14 | 8 |
|
I have read note 651 which states that I require 2 channels for
interconnection of FDDI modules. Are these restricted to the same 6
channels previously mentioned??? Does this mean I'm restricted to
three FDDI modules in an 8 slot hub?
Scott
|
740.4 | Not limited to 3 FDDI. | CGOS01::DMARLOWE | Have you been HUBbed lately? | Mon May 16 1994 12:51 | 20 |
| I'm told that the FDDI modules can use any channel. Ethernet channels
are assigned from the top down and FDDI from the bottom up. FDDI
modules have enough chips in them to connect to any channel. Ethernet
modules presently have enough chips to connect to 6 channels.
Hopefully that will be extended to 10 to 12 in the future.
Another interesting thing I've found with HUBWATCH and the 900 hub.
I regularily create 8 to 10 Ethernets in the hub and everything
is fine. I take a 900TM and connect leg 2 to Ethernet 1. Then
I connect that leg to Ethernet 10 and everything still works fine.
I assume that by creating a LAN that nothing really happens in the
hub other than the hub manager noting how many wires are used or
free. Only by connecting a module to a channel are wires actually
assigned. With the 900TM in the hub and being connected to Ethernet
1 and then being moved to Ethernet 10, I'm assuming that the SAME
wires are being utilized. Only us poor humans think we've selected
a different channel. The hub manager assigns wires in the most
effective way.
dave
|
740.5 | a little more detail... | QUIVER::SLAWRENCE | | Mon May 16 1994 16:26 | 22 |
|
All the FDDI-capable modules can use 14 flex channels (they can't use
the 1 flex channel on the upper connector), so you can configure a full
hub of FDDI.
.4 notes that you can actually use HUBwatch to create more Ethernets
than any (current) module can use; this is correct - but if you were to
try to actually use more than 6 of them it would fail because the
modules would be out of signals. For the new half-height repeaters
that can LAN-hop (DEFMI and DETMI) this limit is 1, since they can use
only the 1 channel on the upper connector. No signals are allocated to
a LAN that has nothing connected to it.
The allocation is more involved than top-down/bottom-up, but the
results are pretty much the same; the hub manager reads from the
modules what signals each module can use for what interface and then
matches the least flexible interfaces (the ones than can use the fewest
signals) with the least valuable signals they can use (a signals value
is the number of interfaces that can use it). The result is that if
there are any Ethernet capable modules in the hub, then the FDDI will
be allocated on the signals that can't be Ethernet.
|
740.6 | Move wires in realtime? | CGOS01::DMARLOWE | Have you been HUBbed lately? | Mon May 16 1994 16:37 | 7 |
| If you only have FDDI in the hub and then start adding Ethernet,
does the hub manager relocate FDDI modules off the Ethernet wires?
If it does then I assume its fast enough that only packets on the
wires at that time are lost?
dave
|
740.7 | How fast can you move real wires? | QUIVER::SLAWRENCE | | Tue May 17 1994 15:54 | 11 |
|
If there is no Ethernet in the hub, the hub manager will not attempt to
avoid using the channels that could have been Ethernet.
If you then add Ethernet and start connecting it, you may displace FDDI
connections onto different channels.
As for how much is lost when you do this, it will certainly be fewer
packets than if you were to swap UTP connections around by hand. LAN
hopping is not switching - you will loose some packets (no, I don't
have a number).
|
740.8 | Good trivia question. | CGOS01::DMARLOWE | Have you been HUBbed lately? | Wed May 18 1994 02:10 | 6 |
| >> (no, I don't have a number).
And you were doing so well until then. 8^) 8^) It's just as well
you said that or the next next question would have been...
dave
|