Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Roger Arquilla who wrote (16241)	5/18/1998 1:05:00 PM
From: Craig Stevenson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29386

Roger, Unfortunately, I'll have to claim ignorance on the Layer 2/3 question. I'm not sure I have a good handle on it myself. I think it has to do with how deeply the switch looks into the packet (Layer 1, 2, 3, etc.) to intelligently route it to the proper port. Perhaps KJ or somebody else can jump in to give a better answer. Craig

To: Roger Arquilla who wrote (16241)	5/18/1998 2:00:00 PM
From: George Dawson	Respond to of 29386

Roger, Here is some information on the Layer 2/3 issue from Bay Networks: baynetworks.com I think FC switches are Layer 2 devices and you can figure out the competition from there. George D.

To: Roger Arquilla who wrote (16241)	5/18/1998 4:42:00 PM
From: KJ. Moy	Respond to of 29386

<<<In the scheme of things, where does Layer 3 fit in the overall picture? Is it a competitor of FC, GE, or ATM?>>> Layer 3 switching combines some functions of ATM and router. It supposedly does both. Its purpose is to relieve router congestion and have better control than ATM switching. You can call it a direct competition to ATM and router and hardly competes with FC. In a typical network with routers and ATM switches, layer 3 switches would replace some routers and yet FC hubs and switches are still needed to provide the kind of SAN we've been talking about. Hope this helps.