Five Story Building Fiber Link Speeds

I am designing a new model and am really grappling with the fiber uplink speeds.  I am trying to build a network resilent enough to support data for the next ten years.  I am trying to decide if I need a 10 gig fiber uplink to my data center on the third floor of the building from each of the adjacent floors.  I am planning on running a 48 port gigabit switch on each floor, and at the moment without VOIP.  But I'm trying to peer into my crystal ball for years down the road to see what my requirements will be.  Currently we are a 10/100 based LAN with all the normal windows domain things, file shares, exchange, internet, etc.  I could also concatenante some 1 gig fiber links, say 4 per floor, to get to almost half the bandwidth but with multiple fiber strands.
Either way I was just hoping for some feedback.  There are advantages to each, I'm just worried as my switches begin to max out the ports, and the computers and network start utilizing the gigabit bandwidth more that my uplinks will begin to be the bottleneck, not today or tomorow, but a few years down the road.  Am I crazy?  Any help would be greatly appreciated, or a link to a thread that has already addressed this issue.
Thanks,
Jason
Network Admin
The Blood Center

/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin-top:0cm;
mso-para-margin-right:0cm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt;
mso-para-margin-left:0cm;
line-height:115%;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}
It’s not easy to comment on how your technology strategy for the next 10 years should be since I do not know anything about what the organization is doing or which applications we can expect on the network.
The easy answer will be to use the highest bandwidths and best switches you can get but this comes with a price that might give you a bad ROI the next 5 years. So what you can do is to look in to the future and predict if video, cloud computing, or any other high bandwidth applications will be present in this infrastructure. And the answer to that should be yes – sure… etc. But when is also a key question. So for your design you should plan ahead and see what you need now and if there is better to upgrade later. Do you then want to do a forklift upgrade and replace everything, or do you want to replace some components / interfaces to get higher bandwidth? You can address now that you have a technology strategy that points out the direction for the next 10 years, and you have a plan on how to build this new network now according to this strategy. You should address that i.e. after 5 years you need to do the next step and invest to upgrade the network according to the strategy to gain higher bandwidth, better SLA or any other upgrade that is critical for the business.
Even if you go for 10Gbps now it might not be what you need in the future. And even if you have a 10 year scope for your strategy you should occasionally do a sanity check and patch up your strategy to meet the requirements from the organization you are going to support, and to be aligned with the technology development.
/André

Similar Messages

  • Upgraded Mini: Link speed = 130Mbps, Transmit rate = 65Mbps

    It was a long night last night.  I finally upgraded my old Mini (Late 2006) with a compatible Atheros AR9280 wifi card.  It's already been upgraded years ago to 2GHz C2D, SSD, 2GB RAM - running Snow Leopard 10.6.8.  So wireless-N is really the last thing to do here.
    Installed easy enough.  Recognized and connected to my AEBS (2nd gen.) - but only at 65Mbps transmit rate.  No matter what - apparently.  Network Utility reports Link Speed at 130Mbps possible. 
    My network:
    AEBS (2nd gen): 2.4GHz N-only, WPA2, Can't go to 5GHz - my tablets/phones not compatible, and AEBS (2nd gen) is not dual-band.
    LAN-connected: Mac Mini Server (2010), Windows 8 laptop, and my NAS.
    WLAN:  Windows 7 laptop, above Windows 8 laptop occasionally, 2 pads, 2 phones, and the old Mini in question.
    All of the above achieve transmit rates at 117-130Mbps depending on where I'm positioned (except the weaker phones and pads).
    Here's what I tried and discovered last night:
    [thinking it's interference/distance/signal problem]
    1. Positioned the mini 6 inches from AEBS - increased signal to -22, but still 65Mbps.
    [thinking it's single vs multiple data stream problem, so then...]
    2. Connected the bluetooth antenna as secondary antenna on the card - increased signal, but still 65Mbps.
    [thinking it's antenna problems, so then...]
    3. Used 2 antennas from parted laptop.  No change.
    [thinking it's a problem with the wifi card, so then...]
    4. Installed the card in an old Windows 7 laptop, installed drivers - Transmits at 130Mbps!!!
    [thinking it's a router issue with Macs only, so then...]
    5. Turned on wifi at the newer Mac Mini Server (2010) - Also transmits at 130Mbps!!!
    [thinking it's Mac OS "registering" my card capabilities as the old 54g card somehow, so then...]
    6. Installed fresh 10.6.8.  No change.
    [thinking it's driver compatibility issue with "IO80211family.kext" version 3.2 (in 10.6.8), so...]
    7. Tried the Lion and Mountain Lion versions of kext above (edited as they don't natively see the AR9280) - Not compatible - No card found.
    [thinking that a beer would be really good to clear my head, so...]
    8. Beer, followed by sleep.
    So the card is fine, antennas are fine, router setup is fine (at least for all other machines).  It must be one of two things:
    A: MacMini (Late 2006) hardware limitation of some kind - Although I have seen others with this upgrade online.
    B: Driver/kext issue.
    Anybody brave enough to take a stab at this?
    Respect -

    Thanks for the effort guys -
    Tried these two suggestions at the same time, by disconnecting all wireless devices, and setting the AEBS to 11n 5GHz only, and rebooting AEBS and the Mini.  Auto channel is the only option in 5GHz - and it chooses channel 100.
    Same story: 65Mbps
    I'm onto another theory now - The card is not an Apple branded Atheros card, although System Profiler accepts that it is (see above screencaps).  It has the same chip, but not the same branding.  Note the "Card type" is reported Airport Extreme (0x168c, 0x1c71).  In other reports I have seen the second half should be 0x8f for the AR9280 card. 
    What also bothers me is that "Locale" is "Unknown".  On the original 54g card it was "FCC".  Perhaps this prevents the card from using its full capabilities?
    But the main issue I can't get my head around is that in other failed upgrade efforts I have seen while searching - their card is just not recognized or unsupported, etc.  My card works - but not full speed.

  • Voice & Data over building to building wireless link

    We have two buildings that are currently connected via a frac-T1. Most of the traffic is data but 2 channels are voice. We want to eliminate the T1 and replace it with a wireless solution. A site survey has been done and we should be ok. The distance between the two buildings is around 4 miles.
    Besides the two antennas and bridges, what equipment would we need and how do we accomplish this feat?
    Thank you.

    For a straight Aironet install, don't forget the stuff you need to put in a fiber link from the Aironet to the rest of the network (transceivers, converters ... it'll depend on what equipment you already have). A span of fiber will help prevent environmental hazards (catching a power line, lightning) from getting to the rest of the network.
    If you want to continue passing the voice, you can probably add a couple 26XX routers at each location with FXS/FXO ports.
    You may want to look at some other options for the point-to-point. There are a number of microwave systems (using non-licensed spectrum) that can give you T1 speeds or higher. The interface is generally a V.35 connection and the bandwidth can be carved up like a traditional T1 (X cannels Data, X channels voice).
    Good Luck
    Scott

  • Can't establish Fiber link between 7609 and 4006

    Our Service Provider runs a 7609 and has Q in Q tunneling to provide us L2 vlan services over a MM Fiber link.
    We have a 4006 on 12.2.25 (EWA9) with a 6 port Gig blade WS-X4306-GB and are trying to establish connectivity on the link, but the conenction remains in down/down state, regardless of the configuration changes we have tried (speed nonegoiate, flowcontrol send/receive on/off, switchport mode trunk/desirable/auto).
    Oddly, the same Gbic and fiber feed, connected into a Cisco 3550 switch comes up with no problem.
    Below are the configurations of the Service Providers 7609, as well as the configuration of the 3550 (which worked), and the configuration we tried on the 4006.
    Please review and advise of any problem you see in the configurations.
    Thanks,
    -Scott
    Customer Cisco 3550 Gi0/2 (Worked to 7609):
    interface GigabitEthernet0/2
    switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
    switchport trunk allowed vlan 750,760
    switchport mode trunk
    speed nonegotiate
    Customer Cisco 4506 Gi3/2 (didn't work to 7609):
    interface GigabitEthernet3/2
    switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
    switchport trunk allowed vlan 750,760
    switchport mode trunk
    speed nonegotiate
    Service Providers Cisco 7609:
    interface GigabitEthernet3/3
    mtu 1546
    no ip address
    speed nonegotiate
    wrr-queue bandwidth 70 30
    switchport
    switchport access vlan 499
    switchport mode dot1q-tunnel
    switchport nonegotiate
    l2protocol-tunnel shutdown-threshold cdp 200
    l2protocol-tunnel shutdown-threshold stp 200
    l2protocol-tunnel shutdown-threshold vtp 200
    l2protocol-tunnel cdp
    l2protocol-tunnel stp
    l2protocol-tunnel vtp
    no cdp enable
    spanning-tree bpdufilter enable
    service-policy input 500mb

    We finally found the problem. Because the LEC put a MUX in the fiber path, we had to add the interface command "pos scramble-atm" to both our router and the ISP's end.
    Once both ends made this change, the circuit came up.

  • MSI RD480 Neo2 : HT Link Speed

    I've just discovered the HT Link Speed limitation in the current 3.2 bios for the MSI RD480 Neo2 and was wondering if MSI is able/going to fix this issue? and add if possible the 2x,3x,4x,etc HTT links??
    Previously this was not an issue since i had an AMD Athlon 3400 (with an AMD set 4x HTT multiplier), this created a HT link of 1,000Mhz when running my cpu/memory to 250 mhz. However with my newer X2 4200 which is factory set at 5x, I'm hitting the HT max mhz limit pretty quick..
    For the moment i can set the HT Link from Auto to 200, however the limited bandwidth is really chocking the system.
    Regards,

    Thanks for the reply Bosskiller.
    In the RD480 3.2 bios there are only two options for HT Links. Auto and 200...  (it's interesting, the popup menu gives the feel that there was plans for more options.)
    From my testing, "auto" seems to take the HT speed burned in by AMD. (800 HT (4x) or 1000 HT (5x))
    I've dropped the cpu divider down to x8 on the x2 4200 (11x factory) and the memory divider to 166 speed (i've ran this pc4000 at 250mhz ddr with this exact mb, just with the single core 3400 (800 HT 4x) cpu. But just to take them out of this issue.
    (auto)
    215 = 1079.4
    220 = 1104
    225 = 1129
    230 = 1153.8
    235 = bios hard lock... (cmos reset)
    (200)
    235 = 235 (boots just fine, currently running prime on the cpu's.)
    Regards,

  • Negotiated Link Speed on MacBook Pro mid-2009 with Kingston SSDNow v300

    Hi,
    I have a mid-2009 MacBook Pro (13") with Kingston SSDNow v300 SSD drive with Mavericks OS X installed.
    I've noticed from different forums that many users have the same problem that I have: SSD drive's Negotiated Link Speed is only 1,5 Gbps, although MacBook Pro mid-2009 should support 3 Gbps speed.
    My system has EFI 1.7 firmware update (MBP55.00AC.B03) installed in and System Info says that 3 Gbps Link Speed should be possible:
    NVidia MCP79 AHCI:
      Vendor:    NVidia
      Product:    MCP79 AHCI
      Link Speed:    3 Gigabit
      Negotiated Link Speed:    1.5 Gigabit
      Physical Interconnect:    SATA
      Description:    AHCI Version 1.20 Supported
    Many users have tried to reset NVRAM and SMC and I have also done these steps, but with not any improvement.
    Some users have mentioned that MacBook Pro mid-2009 has a poor SATA ACHI chipset (NVidia MCP79) and SATA III SSD drives won't work on SATA II speed unless SSD drive is forced to work on SATA II speed by firmware update or by some tweaking tool. Is there this kind of tool available for Kingston SSDNow v300?
    One user says that he got 3 Gbps Negotiated Link Speed on Mountain Lion, but after installing Mavericks, speed dropped to 1,5 Gbps (https://discussions.apple.com/message/23549859#23549859).
    So, is there any way to get Negotiated Link Speed to work on 3 Gbps on Kingston SSDNow v300 with MacBook Pro mid-2009 (for example by installing an older version of Mac OS X) or do I have to buy a new SSD drive from another manufacturer to get 3 Gbps Negotiated Link Speed to work on my machine?
    If the last option (to buy a new SSD drive) is the only option, would it be wise to look for an older model, a SATA II drive, (maybe OCZ Vertex 2) to get 3 Gbps speed?
    Thanks!

    Hi
    I was just as frustated as you after installing the Kingston v300.  I mean it's a solidly built drive with the reliability of kingston (I've been using their RAM for years and years in my desktop PC without problems).  Unfortunately, for a the last 3 months I had it in my 2009 unibody white macbook, it was stuck at link speed 1.5.
    I've been searching in forums since then without any solution.  Even the update for bios is not available for my model.
    I just tried the SMC reset after reading the blog.
    http://thenextweb.com/lifehacks/2010/12/04/how-when-why-to-reset-the-pram-smc-on -your-mac/#!w3XEY
    On reboot, everything seemed faster, so I checked the negotiated link speed and it was at 3 instead of 1.5!  Yay!  Then I checked the disk transfer speed on Blackmagic Disk speed test and it roughly doubled from 138 to 260MB/s.  Now, I'm not going to shutdown or restart...
    I hope this post is useful for people like me stuck at 1.5 Gbps speed.  Good luck

  • How do I get Ethernet Link Speed stuck at 10 Mbit/s to 100?

    I've 100 Mps Internet service.  My iMac limits ethernet to 10 mps, although the specs say it should be capable of at least 100 mps.  A PC connected to the same Time Capsule gets 100 mps.  My network utility claims the link speed is only 10.  If I try to correct the speed manually, it claims the ethernet cord is not plugged in.  I'm using CAT 5e cord.  How can I fix this?
    iMac 3.06 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo; 4 GB 1067 MHz DDR3; OS X 10.8.1

    Thanks!  I've switched the cords to no effect. I fear the Ethernet port (which I've never use before) must be bad.
    Any idea on how I can fix this?

  • Right, MacBook Pro 17" early 2011(Built March) and my new OCZ sata III 6G not working, when is Apple going to admit there is a problem with the Intel's 6 Series Chipset. In System Information it says "Link Speed: 6 Gigabit" which is sata III.

    My MacBook Pro 17" early 2011(built March) and my new OCZ sata III 6G are not working together, when is Apple going to admit there is a problem with the Intel's 6 Series Chipset. In System Information it says "Link Speed: 6 Gigabit" which is sata III and in my MacBook Pro it does not work. 
    Now MacBook Pro 17" early 2011 built May onward do not have this problem it was fixed in the Intel's 6 Series Chipset. (So there is a problem). Cam I have my MacBook Pro fixed please.

    After biting the bullet and ordering more RAM, my computer now is working a ton better. So that must have been the main issue. With 8 GB RAM, I can now even run Parallels fluidly (better than my work PC!) where before simple things like logging in to my MBP after reboot could take forever.
    The place I went to had several other people getting RAM upgrades at the same time as me, so between this and other comments I've seen in discussions here and elsewhere on the Internets, I take it to mean that either Apple should bump up the base RAM on its new machines, and/or stop charging so much for additional RAM.
    I refused to believe a Pro machine bought with Lion installed would come with too little RAM for light to medium usage, but it was apparently the case. I'll mark this as a correct answer and hope some other poor soul will come across this thread and be helped by it.

  • Building a linked list

    Hi, Im having some trouble and was wondering if anyone could figure this out. I need to read in integers to build a linked list, but stuck on what to do after I read in a integer. Any help would be much appreciated!
    class lp
        public int first;
        public lp next;
        public lp(int first1, lp next1)
          first = first1; //first item in list
          next = next1; //next item in list
      public static void main(String[] args)
        int n = 0;
        Scanner sc = new Scanner(System.in);
        while(n!=-1)
        System.out.println("input: ");
        n = sc.nextInt();
        lp l = new lp(n,null); //I tried this but I get a error nonstatic variable this cannot be ref from a static context
    }Edited by: jennahogan1 on Aug 14, 2008 6:15 AM

    jennahogan1 wrote:
    A linked list is a series of nodes with an item(int, string, double, etc) and a reference to the next node in the listRight, it is a data structure as you described. Next question (which has already been asked), "Are you trying to create your own data structure or are you allowed to use Java's?"

  • Anyone get a 300 Mbit link speed using 40 MHz (Channel-Bonding) on 802.11n?

    I recently switched from a MacBook Pro 2.33 C2D 15 to a new MacBook Air 1.86 SSD... For some reason, one little persistent mystery that remains, is that I have been unable to get the Air to establish the link speed at 300 Mbit/s at 40 Mhz (Channel-Bonded). The best I can get is 270 Mbit/s, although my MacBook Pro consistently links at maximum. Signal quality is not an issue...
    Anyone have an idea why? Can an Air owner out there confirm max link, or is this little gem incapable of 802.11n wide 300 Mbit/s?
    Thanks to anyone who can shed light on this little puzzle...

    Thanks for the reply.
    First, you need your TC's 'Radio Mode' set to '802.11n only (5 Ghz)' - (I assume you do, since I don't think the 'Use wide channels' option should appear in any other mode...).
    Now, the quick method to check Link Speed is in the 'Network Utility' Info tab...
    Note that I don't have a major issue with my transfer rates, but do think it's an anomaly for a MacBook Pro to consistently link at 300 Mbit/s and my Air to refuse the same (max 270). In general, I would say that my Air exhibits (a bit) less sensitivity than the Pro with consistent wireless performance (i.e., I never had issues with the Pro acquiring and maintaining wireless links - the Air less so...).
    Thanks for your help.

  • Macbook pro and wnr834b gets only 130 link speed

    i have a macbook pro with the "n" enabled and when i connect to my wnr834b which is an "n" router i only get link speed at 130 instead of 270 which it should be and what it is with all my other computers in the house. how do i get my mbp to connect with 270 link speed? i have the security disabled and have the channels set to auto. please help.

    Here's the odd thing: in Windows XP Pro (under Boot Camp,) the wireless adapter connects @ a very stable 270mbps. On my PowerBook G4, with an nQuicky cardbus card ( http://www.quickertek.com ), it also connects at a stable 270mbps. I've got a Belkin Wireless N router.
    Buffalo Technology has released a dual-band wireless router, operating at simultaneous 2.4gHz and 5gHz frequencies. Wireless N nFiniti Dual Band Router
    Message was edited by: three days at sea

  • Srw224g4 fiber link down

    Support,
    Yesterday for no apparent reason the fiber link between my SRW224G4 and  SLM248G went down. Luckily I have a backup SRW224 switch with a mini-GBIC. I tried both ports on the SRW224G4 switch. Neither would sync with the SLM248G switch. I moved the mini-GBIC to the SRW224 switch. This got the network back up.  
    Why did not SRW224G4 switch fail? I've looked through the logs and only see link down entries. Is there a way to test the switch to see why it failed? Do I need to relpace the switch? Is it still under warranty? What are my options??
    Thanks,
    Bill V 

    i've checked the datasheet for the device and the warranty period is 5 years. you already tried to use a different mini-gbic card for the device, right? i suggest that you try to swap the gbic card also to verify if that will work.

  • SATA link speed

    Hi, this topic didn't appear to be up here yet, so I'm going to ask it. When did the white MacBook switch to the SATA 3.0 Gb/s standard? I recently updated my hard drive to one that has 3.0 capability, but the link speed in the System Profiler says 1.5 only.
    Every bit of research I've done tells me that SATA hardware is forward- and backward-compatible, meaning the only thing standing between my new hard drive and its full capability is the MacBook's firmware.
    I noticed a recent firmware release for MacBook Pros that "unlocks" the faster standard, and it also mentioned that the newer white MacBooks have it already set up no problem. So my question is: Which model is the earliest capable of SATA 3.0 Gb/s? Also, if my late-2007 MacBook is not compatible...why is that? What is actually responsible for this limitation, if not firmware?
    Thanks.
    P.S. Your login link malfunctioned in Safari ("404 - We can't find the page you're looking for"). I had to use Firefox to post this message...my Mac was disappointed. Better get your "geniuses" on that

    Ah yes, I admit now to have forgotten to search the MacBook Pro discussion posts. That's the only place I now see a date mentioned.
    And indeed, this afternoon Safari allowed me to log in, after a week or so of "malfunctioning."
    Thanks for the answer, but I would still like to understand what part of the computer is responsible for the 1.5 Gb/s limitation, since serialata.org clearly states that its hardware is forward compatible.
    You have an impressive collection of devices; can I have one? :P

  • I have 300 stores and I'm looking for a global QOS config that would shape/policy the bandwith based on a % of the detected ISP link speed

    Hi,
    We have 300 stores with mostly the same router config.
    The router in each store is a cisco 891 router capable of doing QOS.
    Each of our store is connected to internet through a local Internet Service Provider (ISP).  They all have different ISP.
    Each store has different Internet plan with different speed, some are DSL, other are using cable modem.
    The connection between the router and the modem is 100Mbps. But the real speed after the modem will be different depending of the Internet plan the store is using. Exemple : 20Mbps download / 2Mbps upload.
    I'm looking for a standard QOS config that would be put in each routeur and that would shape/policy the bandwith based on a % of the detected ISP link speed.  The goal here is to prevent a single desktop computer of the store to take all available bandwith of the ISP link because of youtube , cloud photo upload, etc.
    Because the wan of the router is in the modem at 100Mbps, I cannot use this bandwith indication for the % calculation. The ISP link speed (after the modem)  is much lower than that.  
    In other words, I dont want to set specific qos value or bandwith manual value in each of my 300 router. Especially because the ISP speed is not the same in each site, it's a big job and it's changing all the time.  Stores owner boost their link, etc.
    So, Is there a way within the router to detect the Wan real max speed and to assign dynamically % of the deduced value and assign it to different policy-map rules, etc.
    regards
    Jonathan D

    Disclaimer
    The Author of this posting offers the information contained within this posting without consideration and with the reader's understanding that there's no implied or expressed suitability or fitness for any purpose. Information provided is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as rendering professional advice of any kind. Usage of this posting's information is solely at reader's own risk.
    Liability Disclaimer
    In no event shall Author be liable for any damages whatsoever (including, without limitation, damages for loss of use, data or profit) arising out of the use or inability to use the posting's information even if Author has been advised of the possibility of such damage.
    Posting
    I'm unaware of any (one) "built-in" feature that will do what you're desire.  (BTW, I don't believe PfR, as mentioned by Matt, will do what you desire either, but I've haven't used it in several years.)
    I was looking to address a somewhat similar problem several months ago, and believe I could construct dynamic QoS shaping using an embedded device script working with IP SLA monitoring.  However, the "problem" site (using a cable modem) closed, so I didn't pursue it further.
    An alternative approach would be to use as few policy models as possible.  For example if there are sites with 2, 3 or even 5 Mbps uploads, you might use a 2 Mbps shaper for each.  Of course, sites with more available bandwidth won't obtain the full advantage of it, but your maintenance support will be easier.  Conversely, especially for cable modems, running under their nominal speed might provide much more predictable performance, as HFCs are generally much more variable in their actual available bandwidth, moment to moment.

  • BT Infinity 2 Link speed issue

    Hello guys,
    It's the first time I'm posting here so I hope I'm doing everything correctly.
    I have BT Infinity 2 with the new Home Hub 5 since May. I live quite close to the cabinet, so my link speed has always been the maximum achievable (77.8/19.8). Real speed on 75/19, quite impressive.
    I have never seen any sync issues, disconnections or sync rate dropdowns. Not until today.
    This is ADSL checker for my number.
    Since about a week, I've lost about 10 mbits. These are the current BT Hub details. Looks like I've been downgraded on "Impacted".
    Is there any way to check my line and see if there are problems or stuff like these? In 3 months has been perfect!

    Hi,
    My line is stable so does not loose sync, plus I usually do not turn off the Hub overnight.
    I did that on friday night, and left it on since saturday when I woke up (very late). Nothing has changed...
    The BT Speed Test also shows an horrible upload speed, that however is not true. On Speedtest i manage to get 63/18, with a slighlty higher ping than usual. I've always managed to get 75/19 (or more)

Maybe you are looking for