this post was submitted on 03 Aug 2026
180 points (95.5% liked)

Programmer Humor

32635 readers
2405 users here now

Welcome to Programmer Humor!

This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!

For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.

Rules

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Feyter@programming.dev
anzo@programming.dev
BurningTurtle@programming.dev
pylapp@programming.dev
180
Network (lemmy.zip)
submitted 2 days ago by shark_byte@lemmy.zip to c/programmer_humor@programming.dev
33 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

All hail redundancy

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Brkdncr@lemmy.world 72 points 2 days ago (2 children)

This isn’t redundant, it’s failure points with extra steps.

[–] MNByChoice@midwest.social 22 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Yes. I see two obvious ones of Switch 3 and Switch 5. Did an AI make this? If so, it wasn't a good one.

[–] shark_byte@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

care to explain more? of course the redundant configurations haven't been enabled, so you can see STP doing it's thing.

if everything is done right, then where's the failure point?

[–] pleb_maximus@piefed.zip 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I see the problem with Switches 2 and 5. Because they don't help anything if Switch 3 or respectively 4 go down. They aren't connected to the Routers on their own. So with the current setup you could get rid of the whole row of Switches and not lose any redundancy.
Also, you could think of aggregating your cross connections in Port Channels. Might as well use your ports if you are paying for them anyways.

Oh, and are the WiFi and LAN supposed to be the same net? Because if they are, you don't need to go over the routers to connect between the two of them.

[–] shark_byte@lemmy.zip 4 points 2 days ago (2 children)

well how so?

[–] recursivethinking@lemmy.world 26 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Switches 3 and 4 are single points of failure. The other 2 & 5 are completely ~~redundant~~ unnecessary.

You can just use 2 switches total, cross-connect each to upstream, and do vLANs/subnets to isolate the traffic downstream.

Edit: if you really wanna do physical separation and you want redundancy you'd want to connect 2&5 to both routers.

Honestly tho textbook network with that many nodes for so few devices is already overkill for home, so doing that many switches is just... Idk man, doing full stack troubleshooting for an hour while everyone's just trying to watch a movie is gonna do more hatm than good.

Whoever implements this should probably spin up a ticketing system for the house.

[–] shark_byte@lemmy.zip -2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

yeah true it's a satire topology btw

imagine running high end switches and routers just for your kids.

[–] Brkdncr@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

@recursivethinking@lemmy.world did a better job of explaining it than I could have.