We help IT Professionals succeed at work.

We've partnered with Certified Experts, Carl Webster and Richard Faulkner, to bring you a podcast all about Citrix Workspace, moving to the cloud, and analytics & intelligence. Episode 2 coming soon!Listen Now


situation that tokenring beter than ethernet

teera asked
Medium Priority
Last Modified: 2010-03-19
Are there any situation that toalken ring is better than ethernet
Watch Question

Yes, tokenring distributes network access better over the different nodes. In tokenring, every node in the network has the same priority to send packets onto the network. A token gets passed from one node to the next and only when a node has the token it can send information on the network
In Ethernet every node just throws their information onto the bus and listens to the bus at the same time to find out if perhaps another node also sent information at that same time. This is what is known as a collision. If a sending node hears it's own information back undistorted then it assumes that there was no collision; if it hears something different, then it assumes that it's data was not sent properly. It then waits a bit and tries again.

You can imagine that tokenring performs better on networks with higher utilization and where it is important that all nodes have equal access to the network. Ethernet is better on networks with a lower utilization and with bursty traffic patters.  

Not the solution you were looking for? Getting a personalized solution is easy.

Ask the Experts
Sr. Server Administrator

1.Big advantage of FDDI (ring )was always reliability - mainly from the speed of response to a fault. An FDDI ring could self heal when the ring was cut in a fraction of a second.

2.ethernet will endlessly replicate broadcast packets if you connect it in a ring at layer 2 - this is why spanning tree is used to stop forwarding around any loops in the topology. But it can break down under some types of fault, and it takes a long time to stabilise when a topology chnage occurs. Fast spanning tree is a new standard which improves on this.
if you want a ring is to use point to point Ethernets in a ring between routers - any routing protocol would then send packets the "shortest" way around the layer 3 ring.

3.FDDI was designed for a variety of DIFFERENT application strategies. Figure out what your design strategy is first, then use the topology that fits.  If you will be using unroutable protocols (flames to /dev/null please), the ring of trees design is effective and simple; it avoids bridges so you do not get traffic isolation

4. Token ring has larger frame size capability...however, I have YET    to see a token ring that can run TCP as fast as an ethernet.   The only advice I would offer to pick one technology over the other   is that if some group is using "Cheapernet", use token ring and   route to cheapernet.  Some types of fun, you really don't need.

5Token RIng has an advantage in speed and performance over original ethernet.  There are two TR speeds; 4 and 16 megabits per second (vs 10 Mbps for Ethernet - there is now a standard for 100 Mbps Ethernet but my bet is you don't have it at your school).  Token Ring uses a token passing scheme to regulate traffic flow, Ethernet uses something called CSMA/CD. Carrier Sense (listen before you talk) Multiple Access (multiple users can do this) with Collision Detection (make sure you don't talk when someone else is and visa versa).   Token Ring is like a moderated discussion group.
 Ethernet is like an open discussion group.  

Because of this "moderation" with TR you can determine exactly how much data  can be transmit in any given time period (the people trying to speak don't keep stepping on or interrupting each other) and therefore use the wire more of the time (about 80% for TR and 35% EN)   This is all transparent to you as a user; you only notice if the network is really busy and you can't get through or the response is slow (e.g. takes longer than usual to transfer a file).

The most common reason for using TR is that the user has an IBM mainframe/mini host computer.  IBM is, was, and will continue to be the main proponent of TR. (For quite sometime IBM did not support Ethernet on their mainframes therefore owners had not choice put to use TR).


Access more of Experts Exchange with a free account
Thanks for using Experts Exchange.

Create a free account to continue.

Limited access with a free account allows you to:

  • View three pieces of content (articles, solutions, posts, and videos)
  • Ask the experts questions (counted toward content limit)
  • Customize your dashboard and profile

*This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.


Please enter a first name

Please enter a last name

8+ characters (letters, numbers, and a symbol)

By clicking, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.