Quote:
Originally Posted by Cybersprings
The water pipe example does make sense to explain how bandwidth works for LAN and WAN. And it also showed that he was only considering WAN and not considering that there are a myriad of uses of a LAN for local traffic (incomplete grasp of networks and their usage). And he ended his post with an expletive abbreviation emphasizing his point that was clearly wrong. It is a BFD for some people to have bandwidth on their LAN that exceeds their WAN bandwidth.
Maybe we should try this. Point out 1 single thing that the OP got wrong that warranted all the people trying to point out that it is pointless (and demonstrate that they either don't understand or don't have a complete grasp).
|
We seem to have a completely different view on these posts. There is a considerable amount of negativity but it seems to be coming from a single source and is not directed at the OP.
The OP posted a solution, great. I don't recall one reply that suggested the OP's solution was wrong. The way I read them, most of the responses said they already used that solution, said they had an alternate solution, or my post asked about examples of the problems that might need the solution.
Too many people are quick to purchase a solution (new roof, whole house water filter, reverse mortgage) just because it was presented. There should be nothing wrong with asking what problem the solution is intended to solve - more people ought to be doing that.
To the water pipe analogy: If that poster was shortsighted in not considering a LAN-only requirement then neglecting to consider a LAN/WAN requirement and criticizing that poster is just as shortsighted.