SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : The New QLogic (ANCR)
QLGC 16.070.0%Aug 24 5:00 PM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Kerry Lee who wrote (12356)11/7/1997 11:25:00 PM
From: George Dawson  Read Replies (1) of 29386
 
Kerry

I went back to the Emulex page and looked at the hubs. They are all FC-AL hubs that support FC-AL loops. This could lead to some unusual configurations. I am not sure, but I think the MK II could plug two of these hubs into each FC-AL port and scale up to 5 - 10 times the number of FC-AL ports available.

I don't know if everyone is aware of this, but the 1016 nodes/switch is calculated as 8 ports x 126 nodes(FC-AL) + 8 ports FC = 1016 nodes total. In reality, it is unlikely that a maximum numbers of nodes in FC-AL would be used because total bandwidth is divided across all devices on the loop.

Adding the Emulex hubs can increase the total number of FC devices by 10 to 20 fold per switch. Again this is probably an unacceptably high number for even an average sub-gig amount of traffic on the network. From a practical standpoint it might be a way to get easier remote access - running one cable to the hub instead of a number of cables from the switch ports.

I still think FC has a good shot at the LAN, especially if they can run enough hubs from regular FC ports and they have a seamless ethernet interface. They could configure it to look like a GE switch and they could sell my "hybrid LAN" idea a lot easier.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext