At 5:51 PM 12/6/96, Robert Evans wrote:
>Hi All,
> I am working with this company that is mostly old iron and we are
>helping them add tcp/ip into their 3000+ workstation environment spread
>across 5 buildings. We are adding Unix boxes into their network,
>switched atm.
> Today I found out that they have 300 - 400 devices using tcp/ip and the
>whole network is on one class b network. No subnets anywhere. Eventually
>they are going to be adding other facilities online and they expect that
>the tcp/ip services are going to catch on like wildfire in the
>organization.
> Any ideas on how I am going to convince these guys that this is
>ridiculous? Any other good stories about such situations? I could use a
>laugh after this one.
>Bob
Once upon a time, I'd probably have the same reaction, but not any more.
It's not as far fetched as you think. There's a well written white paper
out on Madge Networks web site called, "The Architecture of Switched LANS".
Read it and ponder the possibilities. Don't forget to discount the
small amount of ATM proselytizing.
Don't get the wrong idea, I think thousands is pushing it, but the
principles that we've grown accustomed to, i.e. designing networks based
on the mechanics of IP addressing, are becoming a bit obsolete. If we
don't reevaluate our basic principles occasionally, we may suffer the
same fate.
chris
|
|
