Tell me if I've got this right.....(please)

Jan 19, 2006 67 Replies

Precisely...

And fwiw, a goodly majority of my machines are headless and older, low-powered machines. My webserver is a Cyrix 150, my fileserver is a Pentium 233. I'll probably just consolidate those two machines. The one I'm wiring ethernet to is for the Missus to run modern games on Windows2000. I've got an old K6-II for running the older games that refuse to run on Win2K/XP, and it will also double as a printcenter and video camera repository. There is a headless media machine that can stream music or video on demand, and then there is my FreeBSD workstation that I primarily use. There's an older linux box that i used to use for software development and OS testing.... Then there's the OpenBSD firewall, etc. etc. blah...

A lot of the roles of these machines will probably change, and i could get by without most of them, but i don't *want* to.

Wireless is much more complicated*. It's also harder to set up, less reliable, slower (in many cases), and less secure.

I would not recommend wireless for any place you could run cable.

There's a lot of other problems with wireless.

100Mbps makes sense if you're EVER going to transfer a large file. Today you may have no idea what you're going to do 10 years from now.

I find that I'm frequently transferring video files (often around 1GB) in size. When I first set up a network, I had no idea I would be doing that.

There is 1000Mbps (1Gbps), but there will be very little if any need for that in a small network.

&&&

  • - Think about that. You've got a pair of radio transceivers as well as a lot of support electronics. That's already significantly more complicated that a couple pairs of copper wire. There's more to fail (and more you have to do to get it working, if it works at all).

Also, microwave ovens operate at close to 2.4Ghz. You may get a free "dinner bell" with a wireless network.

And you never know who's connected to YOUR network.

That's about what I got with Windows 9x. Switching to NT (2000, I will never use XP!) changed that to over 50mbps (for a simple large file transfer).

Compare those to the approximately 5Mbps you get with wireless (considering the large amount of overhead, and the difference between "ideal conditions" and real ones. Expect much lower range than advertised) for 802.11b. I haven't used the newer 802.11g that claims

54Mbps but would expect significantly less than that.

I have a computer in my bedroom, connected to WIRED ethernet. I sometimes use it to access the web or other computers from there. Often, that access has been to control my home automation system.

I do turn it off at night, because of the noise. It's controlled by an X10 module and the same macro I use to turn other things off at bedtime. Good thing this computer will start up by itself when it gets power.

That is not considered "properly secured" anymore. It's to easy to change the MAC. Most of what I hear recommends a wireless encryption called "WPA".

Of course, you don't have this problem with a wired network, where all the wires are in an area you control.

When I had a dog, he ate a lot of Jerusalem Artichoke (not an artichoke, more like a sunflower) leaves.

If you run a piece of pre-made cable through walls, you have to make bigger holes (to get a connector through). All of the network wiring I did used smaller holes, with connectors added later.

Those are probably made. I have used such for RJ11/RJ6 connectors.

If RF is dangerous, cell phones would be considerably safer if designed with the antenna at the other end. This would have an insignificant effect on range.

when it works

Wireless is good for non-fixed installations (where you move the computer frequently). For a home machine, wired is preferable (could it be that you never used a wired connection?).

and you never know when you'll want to transfer a few 1GB files between computers.

And it'll make you feel good, thinking about all that money and effort you saved, when your network isn't working (or someone outside used it when they weren't supposed to, and downloaded a bunch of child p*rn).

There are testers that are supposed to be able to locate breaks in a cable, but they probably cost too much.

If you want a truly "secure" computer pull the plug from the wall. Newer routers for the home are better now because they install with a firewall in place. Heck WinDOZE is your biggest security breach. It installs and leaves you open to hacks the minute you plug any network adapter in.

Lets see. You have a 100Mbps cable capacity, most likely limited by a

10Mbps network interface card (NIC) unless it is a 10/100 card. Moving the 1Gig file IMHO would not be any faster if the NIC can't handle the data.

Oren

"My doctor says I have a malformed public-duty gland and a natural deficiency in moral fiber, and that I am therefore excused from saving Universes."

It's never stopped working. Not in two years.

Possible but not likely...we are 200 yards from road and nearest neighbor.

-- dadiOH ____________________________

dadiOH's dandies v3.06... ...a help file of info about MP3s, recording from LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that. Get it at

formatting link

How do you protect the filesystem when you yank power unceremoniously? Starting a computer when power is supplied is a BIOS option. Generally the default is not to power on when power is restored but there is usually (always IME) an option to power on.

Never a problem. At least I keep my microwave door closed when it's in operation. ;-)

Strong encryption solves this problem. We use wireless networks in the conference rooms at work, where they're quite concerned about security.

I won't use XP at home, but am forced to on my company issued laptop.

That's what I normally get at work, vs. the 100Mbit ethernet. In reality both are limitied upstream to about 10Mbit, on a good day. Some servers are even more limiting.

correct

I guess I'm lucky in that there's a place nearby that sells it by the foot. Even a thousand foot box can be pretty cheap, though -- I think Fry's had it on sale (non-plenum) for about $30 a box this weekend.

In theory i *could*

If you terminate the cable with female keystones instead of males (which is really how it should be done, IMHO), you just need a punchdown tool, and those can be quite cheap (I think Leviton even packages a disposable plastic one with every keystone they sell at Home Depot). Then you use a patch cable to extend from the keystone in the wall to the equipment (e.g. PC).

I already had this

Those are available, too, but the ones I've seen have cost more than a proper keystone.

Wired can be faster, more secure and more reliable. Of course, if wireless is fast, secure, and reliable enough for you, it wins on convenience.

As far as securing it, I use the MAC

I chuckle when I see ads for wireless devices touting their increased power and range, and the availability of repeaters. That's the _last_ thing I would want.

Actually, some NICs can now do TDR, and they don't seem to cost (much, if any) more than the ones that don't.

No joke. When my daughter took her brand new computer to college, it was infected within minutes of being plugged into the campus network. There's no way she could even download the patches from Microsoft in time to avert it.

Gigabit cards can be had for under 10 bucks now.

I wouldn't assume the OP is similarly situated.

yup... the average infection time on campus is a couple minutes here at CMU... and they do lots of scanning and disabling. I've taken to building machines behind a hardware firewall until a software firewall can be put in place.

Join the Discussion

Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.

Didn't find your answer?

Ask the community — no account required