sichermn@beach.csulb.edu (Jeff Sicherman) (04/12/91)
Has anybody chosen to install an Arcnet lan instead of an Ethernet one for a new system (contemporary choices, not in the distant past) ? What were your reasons/justifications, especially besides price, since Ethernet is a dejure standard and Arcnet only defacto. I am trying to decide which way to go for a small business, at most 8 workstations including database server on a Lantastic system. No near term prospect of growth in count or distance. From what I've read it just seems to me that Arcnet is more stable and less sensitive to problems of installation and operation and a more mature option, especially for twisted-pair installations on phone line/star config. (I'm a little scared by the newness of 10baseT). I need to convince myself and a client that this is appropriate, however, especially since it seems to go against the herd.
sylvia@brahms.udel.edu (Sylvia M Berta) (04/12/91)
Regardless of the size of the network, I would still recommend ethernet over Arcnet...the latter is SLOW! I have one location here on campus that only has two stations, and no access to the backbone...we have the cable running through the ceiling from one adjacent office to the other, and have had no problem (thin coax). We also have situations where the entire floor of a medium sized building is cabled with thinnet, using a Cabletron MR9000-C Multiport repeater (we use them all over campus for our Novell nets) using all 8 ports for the different legs, supporting about 70+ machines running Novell on DOS machines (and Macs), and including a small cadre of Sun's (about 8). We have two other locations where we're using UTP instead of thinnet, and things are no problem there, either. IMHO, UTP is as good as thinnet, if the circumstances dictate its use (i.e., large setup with offices scattered all over...it's much easier to manage with UTP). But for a small setup, why bother? Thinnet is inexpensive and practical. As for people pulling connections apart, with a little practice, it's easy to make a good connection with BNC's...I've done hundreds of them. Our standard was that it had to stay together when you pulled hard on it. If it didn't, then you didn't do it correctly, and had to do it again. We tested every connection we made...sure, it took a little more time to be careful, but once it was done...clear sailing! 8-) So don't be afraid of ether...it's a proven standard, and reasonably priced, to boot. And running on 10-base-T is fine, too...perhaps unnecessary in this case. As for the network itself, I am admittedly partial to Novell. With the new pricing structure (a 10-user package of 2.2 SFT for $1995 list...and who pays list?), it's a bargain for the security and features that you get! Oh well...sorry for the soapbox attitude, but why settle for less, when you can have so much more for a minimal increase in cost? Good luck ... Syl
brian@telebit.com (Brian Lloyd) (04/13/91)
In our networks here at Telebit we mix UTP and thin ethernet as a matter of course. We use centralized 10baseT hubs for the distribution of signal to, for the want of a better term, "workgroups." At each workgroup (usally a cluster of cubicles) we use an UTP-to-thin ethernet repeater/adaptor. This way we get the isolation and ease of cabling that UTP provides, and we get the flexibility for adding or removing devices that thin ethernet provides. -- Brian Lloyd, WB6RQN Telebit Corporation Network Systems Architect 1315 Chesapeake Terrace brian@napa.telebit.com Sunnyvale, CA 94089-1100 voice (408) 745-3103 FAX (408) 734-3333