<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>fluffigt.com &#187; switch</title>
	<atom:link href="http://fluffigt.com/tag/switch/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://fluffigt.com</link>
	<description>*poof* said fluff...</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Dec 2011 13:30:42 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Power consumption on office switches</title>
		<link>http://fluffigt.com/2008/08/22/power-consumption-on-office-switches/</link>
		<comments>http://fluffigt.com/2008/08/22/power-consumption-on-office-switches/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Aug 2008 05:58:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>mld</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Computers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cabling]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[networking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[power]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[switch]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fluffigt.com/?p=1708</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Russel Coker wrote about switches and cables, and thinks putting a "dumb switch" on every desk is a good solution for office networking. He's got a couple of valid points, for example that it's possible to use less cables from the patch room, no (or less) dependency on network gurus and so on. What he [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Russel Coker <a href="http://etbe.coker.com.au/2008/08/22/switches-and-cables/" target="_blank">wrote about switches and cables</a>, and thinks putting a "dumb switch" on every desk is a good solution for office networking. He's got a couple of valid points, for example that it's possible to use less cables from the patch room, no (or less) dependency on network gurus and so on.</p>
<p>What he doesn't talk about is that</p>
<ul>
<li>Power consumption goes up. Each office switch typically uses between 5W and 10W depending on how good the AC/DC-adaptor is. (<a href="http://forum.openwrt.org/viewtopic.php?id=2162" target="_blank">example</a> of WRT54 power consumption)</li>
<li>You get many more SPOF. Okay, most switches actually works quite good, but office support will have to answer a great many calls of "Internet is down" etc.</li>
<li>Configuration of a "real" switch isn't that complicated, draws less power and usually gives _many_ more possibilities than the dumb table-top switch (ie VLAN, bridging, <acronym title="Quality of Service">QoS</acronym>, ...)</li>
</ul>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://fluffigt.com/2008/08/22/power-consumption-on-office-switches/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

