which physical layer standard does CSMA/CD rely on?

Question

which physical layer standard does CSMA/CD rely on?

is that a logical question? I don't know.

Here is the real question -
You have been asked to help upgrade the LAN at a very successful CPA firm
with five departments in one building and a total of 560 employees. Although
the firm’s employees understand accounting, they haven’t spent much time
improving their network. Currently, it runs 10Base-T Ethernet and relies on
35 hubs to connect every user workstation to the network. Most of these
workstations were purchased within the past two years, when the firm experi-
enced a growth spurt. The hubs are connected to the backbone via switches.
The CPA firm wants to upgrade its LAN, but not at great cost. It also wants
to ensure that it can easily expand its LAN in the future. It has already
decided to use a version of Linux as its network operating system. What kind
of LAN will you design for this company? Describe its physical and logical
topologies, what access method it will use, and what Physical layer standard
this access method should rely on. What types of infrastructure upgrades are
necessary to implement your suggested network?

Answer 1

One thing I would do that would really fix this is replace the HUBS with good Switches... preferably Cisco base.



If you google the difference between HUBS and Switches, you will see the difference. There is just too much to write on them.



The OSI model layer you are asking about is Layer 2 for the CSMA. It relays on the Data Link Layer.

Answer 2

I could discuss this for HOURS...



But...



obviously CSMA/CD is a LAYER 1 protocol.



It happens ON THE CARD in the microcode... right?



Second... the key to good networking is INTELLIGENT sub-netting..



With Gigabit - it's not as important to zone and connect between Switches (not hubs) with FIBRE as it was in the "olden days".



Set up strategic SUB-NETS... and ISOLATE TRAFFIC where practical.



that's all you get for 2 points.

Answer 3

My Opinion is definite. And the clarification..... My spouse isn't petite and not flat chested. She's a length sixteen. yet she completes the the actual readiness assessments (For the army so particular, this is decrease than different amenities) greater effective than lots of the adult males in her age selection. and that's in accordance with easily circumstances and volume of the standards, no longer factors taylored for her gender/age. She is likewise a Command wellbeing chief. I relatively have served with many women that look like they could no longer do a push-up, yet placed adult males to disgrace to boot as women that are what's in many circumstances happening as "type cloth" which could no longer even run four hundred and forty yards devoid of being winded. the protection stress pays nicely sufficient and has sufficient advantages that if a woman believes that she has "larger physique" areas that are too enormous and hindering her overall performance, she will ask the command to approve augmentation to be decreased to a greater proportionate length. And the girls prepared to do that are patently the girls who practice the terrific dedication to their provider. I won't dispute that there is technology that exhibits that there's a distinction between the actual composition of adult males and ladies, yet anybody who says it is not trustworthy and that they shouldn't could try this has on no account considered a 150lb female on the flight deck of a pitching airplane provider manning one end of a hernia bar to mount a 500lb bomb to the backside of an F/A-18C. women would be merely as puzzling middle as adult males, they merely could get previous their own psychological barriers.