OK, so the company I work for is moving to a new building.

As part of the move, I thought it would be nice to buy some new gigabit 

brand you buy. But when HQ got wind of this, they said "oh no, you must 
buy these Cisco switches, that way they'll match what everybody else has".




Well anyway, HQ bought the switches themselves. I got an email the other 
day to say they've finished configuring them now. (It's a switch? What's 
to configure? It's a passive component...) They're about to ship them over.

Yesterday I got a document describing the configuration of the switches. 
And now it all becomes horribly clear.

These "switches" are actually *routers*. That's why they're so damn 
expensive - each one is a 24-port *router*!!

Um... we don't *need* routers. We have 1 subnet. We just need some 
ordinary switches. Oh well...

But wait! Looking at the configuration details, it seems HQ want to 
split my network into several seperate subnets, and have configured the 
routers to route between them.

Er... why?? This isn't necessary. All this does is massively increase 
the complexity of my network. For no gain. Why are you going this?? (And 
why is today the first I've heard of this?)

*sigh* Clearly I'm going to have to make some phone calls... :-(

[Seriously. Do these people just enjoy making things complicated for the 
fun of it? Are they trying to prove how cleaver they are or something? 
Perhaps this is job security? I don't know, but where I'm from, it's 
usual to go with the *simplest* solution that does what you want, not 
the most complicated one...]

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

> [Seriously. Do these people just enjoy making things complicated for the 
> fun of it? Are they trying to prove how cleaver they are or something? 
> Perhaps this is job security? I don't know, but where I'm from, it's usual 
> to go with the *simplest* solution that does what you want, not the most 
> complicated one...]

Oh I see it all the time that people do (or don't do) stuff just to keep 
themselves busy, rather than for the overall good of the company.  You'd be 
stupid to suggest (or not suggest something) that meant you no longer had 
any work to do...

Post a reply to this message

Seems like a sharp admin guy could both optimise the network performance 
and end up with a couple of shiny 24-port Cisco routers at his personal 
disposal.

Post a reply to this message

scott wrote:

> Oh I see it all the time that people do (or don't do) stuff just to keep 
> themselves busy, rather than for the overall good of the company.  You'd 
> be stupid to suggest (or not suggest something) that meant you no longer 
> had any work to do...

Au contrare, I'd have to be a *genius* to think up something that means 
that *I* no longer have any work to do. ;-)

[Well, other than obvious options like "hey, let's not use computers any 
more..."]

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Paul Fuller wrote:
> Seems like a sharp admin guy could both optimise the network performance 
> and end up with a couple of shiny 24-port Cisco routers at his personal 
> disposal.

Good thinking - but what do I need a 24-port router for?

[More interesting: What happens to the 7 network switches we're using 
currently? They'll all be surplus once the move is done...]

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

>> Oh I see it all the time that people do (or don't do) stuff just to keep 
>> themselves busy, rather than for the overall good of the company.  You'd 
>> be stupid to suggest (or not suggest something) that meant you no longer 
>> had any work to do...
>
> Au contrare, I'd have to be a *genius* to think up something that means 
> that *I* no longer have any work to do. ;-)

Recruit a trainee IT dude?

Post a reply to this message

Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> (It's a switch? What's 
> to configure? It's a passive component...)

  Wikipedia:

"Low-end network switches appear nearly identical to network hubs, but
a switch contains more "intelligence" (and comes with a
correspondingly slightly higher price tag) than a network hub. Network
switches are capable of inspecting data packets as they are received,
determining the source and destination device of that packet, and
forwarding it appropriately. By delivering each message only to the
connected device it was intended for, a network switch conserves
network bandwidth and offers generally better performance than a hub."

  That sounds to me like being more than just a passive component (unlike
a dumb hub which just forwards blindly everywhere)...

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

scott wrote:

>> Au contrare, I'd have to be a *genius* to think up something that 
>> means that *I* no longer have any work to do. ;-)
> 
> Recruit a trainee IT dude?

I would think there would probably still be more work than the two of us 
can get through...

But I take your point: If we hire, say, six trainee IT people, once I 
finish training them all I wouldn't have much work to do.

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

>> (It's a switch? What's 
>> to configure? It's a passive component...)
> 
>   Wikipedia:
> 
> "Low-end network switches appear nearly identical to network hubs, but
> a switch contains more "intelligence" (and comes with a
> correspondingly slightly higher price tag) than a network hub. Network
> switches are capable of inspecting data packets as they are received,
> determining the source and destination device of that packet, and
> forwarding it appropriately. By delivering each message only to the
> connected device it was intended for, a network switch conserves
> network bandwidth and offers generally better performance than a hub."
> 
>   That sounds to me like being more than just a passive component (unlike
> a dumb hub which just forwards blindly everywhere)...

A hub is little more than an amplifier. A switch contains actual control 
electronics. That much is true. However, a switch still does the same 
*job* as a hub - it just does it better. There still isn't anything that 
needs to be "configurated". [But, as I found out, these switches are 
actually routers.]

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

> A hub is little more than an amplifier. A switch contains actual control 
> electronics. That much is true. However, a switch still does the same 
> *job* as a hub - it just does it better. There still isn't anything that 
> needs to be "configurated".

Oh yes there is.

I have a Cisco Catalyst 2950 sat here that has a serial port connection for 
configuration.

For a start you can configure security on a per-port basis, ie limit access 
to MAC address etc.

Then you can make rules for dropping packets, based on MAC address, IP 
address etc.  Ie you could prevent the sockets in your conference room from 
seeing your mail server unless a known MAC address was plugged in.

You can also have it notify you if an unknown MAC address appears on the 
switch.

And a load of QoS stuff.

We also have our VoIP network going through the same switch as our data 
network, this needs to be configured too.

They're far from simple boxes.

Post a reply to this message