RE: Linksys card and Cisco switch

[Stephen Carville <carville cpl net>]

On Fri, 29 Jun 2001, Jeff Busch wrote:

- The "portfast" option is a standard of mine for switch-to-client
- connections.

Absolutely.  I inherited the switch and its configuration and a review
and update of the network -- which works pretty well -- has been a low
priority compared to setting up monitoring for the Oracle and web
servers and straightening out the backup situation.  The previous
admin was the Windows guys who doesn't think outside the dialog box.

- I really only have autonegotiation problems between switches,
- so I'll lock both of them at 100/full (or just the cisco if the other switch
- is unmanaged).  This eliminated any problems I had with interfaces coming up
- and going down ...

OK makes sense,  I've done the same for router to switch connections.

- Of course do not use portfast on a switch-to-switch uplink.

Unless you think you can live without spanning tree :-)  I saw a setup
about four years ago where a lab tech had plugged a 100 Mbps hub into
a 2924 switch.  Twice.  With no spanning tree.  His reasoning was that
two paths to the switch would give him 200 Mbps at full duplex.  Then
he called the NOC bitching that his performance was in the toilet.

And people wonder why I favor flogging and the public pillory for
idiots...

-- 
--Stephen Carville
http://www.heronforge.net/~stephen/gnupgkey.txt
==============================================================
Government is like burning witches:  After years of burning young women
failed to solve any of society's problems, the solution was to burn more
young women.
==============================================================