Path: utzoo!dptcdc!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cornell!batcomputer!itsgw!steinmetz!crdgw1!uunet!ingr!goodloe
From: goodloe@ingr.com (Tony Goodloe)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans
Subject: Re: Request For Opinions: FDDI follow-up
Message-ID: <5011@ingr.com>
Date: 17 Apr 89 18:07:05 GMT
References: <4824@charon.unm.edu> <29505@bu-cs.BU.EDU> <1507@Portia.Stanford.EDU> <29650@bu-cs.BU.EDU>
Organization: Intergraph Corp. Huntsville, Al
Lines: 14

In article <29650@bu-cs.BU.EDU>, kwe@bu-cs.BU.EDU (kwe@bu-it.bu.edu (Kent W. England)) writes:
> 	I think the typical workstation ring will be single ring,
> because people can't afford and don't need dual ring on the
> workstation nets.  Just like the IBM-PC token rings, the workstation
> nets will be star wired and the concentrator will take stations in and
> out of the ring, electrically I imagine.

I agree here, that if you have a single ring subnet coming off of a
concentrator, that you don't need bypass on those stations. Any comments
I made were thinking about a dual-attached station. Does anyone have any
figures based on data that would suggest what portion of stations will
be single-attached, and double-attached?

tony goodloe