Newbie Question Followup: How much LAN bandwidth is "a little"?

Dear Network Experts,

I was just told by EE that the 40K my application is passing is trivial on most LANs.  However, there is some concern at my company that some networks might still be operating at 19,200/sec.  My product is for corporate customers.  I think they're mostly on 10 or 100 mbits.  They also have WANs.  

I'm a network dummy.  Do you think we'll ever run into anyone using 19,200/sec in corporate world?  Do WANs have a lot less bandwidth than LANs?

Thanks again,

BrianMc1958
BrianMc1958Asked:
Who is Participating?
I wear a lot of hats...

"The solutions and answers provided on Experts Exchange have been extremely helpful to me over the last few years. I wear a lot of hats - Developer, Database Administrator, Help Desk, etc., so I know a lot of things but not a lot about one thing. Experts Exchange gives me answers from people who do know a lot about one thing, in a easy to use platform." -Todd S.

trymelatrCommented:
I would have to agree and say its trivial.  Is it a constant 40k?  Or just peek at 40k?  You might want to find out what some other apps run at...some that Corporations use a lot of and compare.

WAN's tend to have slower speed compared to LAN's but it all depends on the link.  Some are just dial up...and other are extremely fast.
0
FocusynCommented:
No.  19,200 is ridiculously old and slow.  Yes, WANs have less bandwitdh than lans generally, because LANs are only limited by the capacity of the internal hardware (switches, routers, NICs etc) but WANs are single or multiple line connections from one physical location to another which come through service providers who usually charge by bandwaidth amount, and the most common WAN types are very very expensive.  My organization pays over $3,000,000 a year for our WAN lines, some of which are fast, some of which are slow.  I can tell you that we have a very large, and in some areas very old network, and our slowest WAN lines (which are only used as backup lines when main lines are down) are half-duplex 128K lines (the equivalent of 128,000 compared to the 19,200 you were asking about).  even on 19,200, a 40K file is not going to take all that long.

I think most people are using 256K, 512K and T1 minimally in smaller orgs and much much faster lines for larger ones.  Our central WAN core uses 15Mb lines (15,000,000 compared to 19,200) and we are not cutting-edge.
0

Experts Exchange Solution brought to you by

Your issues matter to us.

Facing a tech roadblock? Get the help and guidance you need from experienced professionals who care. Ask your question anytime, anywhere, with no hassle.

Start your 7-day free trial
rubiconxCommented:
Without going into extensive detail, no company in todays electronic world, could survive with a 19.2k network!  I don't know what your software does, but I doubt if you could find a company, that has a network, running below 10mbps.

Dave
 
0
FocusynCommented:
yah, a constant 40K stream would totally kill a line as slow as 19,200 and severly tax a 56,000 line.  If it's not constant though, it's totally negligible even on a slow one. You're talking about using about 16-20 seconds of the full bandwidth of a 19,200 line to pass that, maximum.  And I seriously doubt you'll run in to any significant business using lines that slow.
0
BrianMc1958Author Commented:

Thanks again, Experts!

Yours,
BrianMc1958
0
It's more than this solution.Get answers and train to solve all your tech problems - anytime, anywhere.Try it for free Edge Out The Competitionfor your dream job with proven skills and certifications.Get started today Stand Outas the employee with proven skills.Start learning today for free Move Your Career Forwardwith certification training in the latest technologies.Start your trial today
Networking

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.

Question has a verified solution.

Are you are experiencing a similar issue? Get a personalized answer when you ask a related question.

Have a better answer? Share it in a comment.