Re: Netgear 8 Port 10/100 Switch (Hub)

Rob Morley <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> In article <1gd7kxd.1m67mf0gorb4dN%{$PW$}@womar.co.uk>, "Paul Womar"
> {$PW$}@womar.co.uk says...
> > Rob Morley <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >
> > > In article <c73fdh$hs446$(E-Mail Removed)>, "Dr Zoidberg"
> > > AlexNOOOO!!!!@drzoidberg.co.uk says...
> > > > A switch is *not* a hub.
> > > > They do a similar job but are actually significantly different.
> > > >
> > > Actually a switch is a hub, but a hub is not necessarily a switch.
> >
> > I disagree. A hub is a multiport repeater, a switch is a multiport
> > hardware bridge.
> >
> A dumb hub is indeed a repeater, but a switch is not a bridge.

A switch uses dedicated hardware to replicate the functionality of a
traditional multiport bridge at higher speeds. If you Google on
'multiport bridge switch' it comes up with about 10,000 results, plenty
of them agreeing with that.

> It would
> only be a bridge if it was bridging between different media or different
> network segments, otherwise it's a port-switching hub.

One of the primary purposes of a switch is indeed to segment the network
into separate collision domains, just like a bridge.

> Anyway, this is pointless and way off-topic, so followup set to
> uk.comp.home-networking, where it's vaguely on-topic.

Posted to both groups before setting followups so they have some context
to go on.

Also found a good introuction to bridging & switching on Cisco's site
for anyone interested:
<http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/cisintwk/ito_doc/bridging.htm>
--
-> The email address used in this message *IS* valid <-

(Vs V zragvba zl PPAN & PPQN ng guvf cbvag, vf gung fgvyy pbafvqrerq
rabhtu gb pnyy zr n jnaxre gurfr qnlf?)


Paul Womar