Home > IT Answers > Networking > Maximum Number of switched hops in a network
Help

Question

  Asked: Jul 2 2008   3:57 PM GMT
  Asked by: Thedocfox

Maximum Number of switched hops in a network


Network, Network design

Trying to get a definitive answer on how many switched hops you can put in a network. I'm trying to reach a portion of our building, that with the bends and twists and turns in the wiring, I'd be looking at about 400 - 500 feet straight through.
I do already have three switched hops from my server to the end point now (server -> hop1 -> hop2 -> hop3). According to the research I've already found from googling and my own knowledge, the 5-4-3-2 rule wouldn't apply anymore because of the switches in play.
I'm not worried about capacity as there are only a few users connected to each switch. Latency I wouldn't imagine would be too horrible.
So, can you confirm, deny, or answer: How many hops can I truly do? Would latency be a big problem? Am I correct in assuming distance is no longer a factor because no single hop is over 100m?

Thank you in advance for your help!!
-Dustin

Subscribe to Alerts! Get questions and answers delivered to your Inbox.


E-mail me updates on this question



   SUBSCRIBE

hidden modal window
Help

Answer Wiki (Improve, edit or add to this answer)

IMPROVE THIS ANSWER
View History
 RATE THIS ANSWER
0
Click to Vote:
  •   0
  •  0
Last Answered: Jul 4 2008  6:14 PM GMT  by Morgan1628


Latest Contributors: Peterp


Just to add another perspective to what Bobkberg and Labnuke99 provided:

If you are making multiple runs to systems in distant areas, you could always do an uplink to a far end switch, and patch in users from there. The advantage in that instance would be making shorter runs at the other end instead of having to make multiple long runs. You save on man hours and cabling expenses.

I have a network that I work on which was already set up that way. It helps out a lot when I have to add a drop at the far end and I have a patch panel or switch close by.
  • AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Browse more Questions and Answers on Networking.

Looking for relevant Networking Whitepapers? Visit the SearchNetworking.com Research Library.


RSS - Discussions Help

Discuss This Answer


You must be logged-in to discuss a question. Log-in/Register

Labnuke99  |   Jul 2 2008  4:48PM GMT

Why wouldn’t you run fiber to the remote end of the building from your main distribution facility (MDF)? Put the traffic over fiber which has a longer distance rating (2km).

 

Bobkberg  |   Jul 3 2008  2:58PM GMT

Labnuke’s point is correct, but I’d like to beat on the subject a little more.

Any time you can avoid daisy-chaining a switched network is a major plus.

The only reason to not follow Labnuke’s suggestion is where the cost to re-run fiber is prohibitive. This would include things like conduits stuffed to capacity, working in a very old building, legacy equipment with no options (or budget) for upgrade.

Even so, there may be the opportunity to reconfigure the layout to be more like a star than a daisy chain, since that will also reduce the number of hops for any given frame, and will keep the traffic off of segments where it’s not required.

Bob

 

Robert Stewart  |   Jul 7 2008  3:43PM GMT

Run fiber or adhere to the 5-4-3-2 rule.

 

Schmidtw  |   Jul 8 2008  7:43PM GMT

Borrowing from Bobkberg’s response:

Daisy-chaining + networking = bad. (information from floor 7 has to push through switches on floors 6,5,4,3, etc…)
Star Topology + networking = good. (information from floor 7 is sent directly to backbone)

Remember, the farthes component will be pushing information through along side every other closer component…too much traffic will greatly decrease performance.

And borrowing from Labnuke99’s response:

1. Network Cable (cat6) has much higher headroom than cat5.
2. Consider fiber optic cabling.

Also consider this:
You probably have GB ports on your switches, but if you are daisy-chaining, normal traffic is easily FAR above GB. Also, if you don’t have matched NICs for speed, GB switches are useless.