Networking question

I have an 8-port 10/100 router, I need at least one more port, lets say I need 4 more. Would there be any diff between using 2 x 5-port gigabit switches (not daisy chained) as opposed to 1 x 8-port? I'd have 2 x NAS boxes and a gigabit backup pc nic into 3 of the ports i.e, faster NAS backup. Ahhhh, just thinking for a sec, I spose an 8-port might be better since any gigabit kit wouldn't need to go through the router and slow it down to 100? Errrrr, hmmmmmmmm. I'm even more confused now :)

Reply to
brass monkey
Loading thread data ...

One of the sites I sometimes use doesn't list any switches with fewer than 8 ports! The cheapest 8-port gigabit being only a bit over twenty quid. Not worth the candle unless you actually have then in your hand.

Reply to
polygonum

why not just get a 16 or 24 port gigabit switch? plug all your devices into it and jusy run one cat5 cable from the new gigabit switch to the router?

Assuming you have GigE capable computers and 1gig capable network wiring......

I have a 48 port 48gigabit/s throughput Netgear switch which in turn is connected to my virgin router.

Reply to
Stephen H

No you're not, you are thinking logically. Daisy-chain the gigabit switches if one hasn't got enough ports, and just one cable to link them to your router.

Reply to
Graham.

Reply to
brass monkey

I have a 48 port 100Mbps switch here..and ONE lead in the back of the poxy router.,

The less a consumer router has to do, in general the better it does it.

Reply to
The Natural Philosopher

This sort of thing might help, if you really do need just one or two more. Worked well for me in the past, but need to be used in pairs.

formatting link

Reply to
Georg von Krapp

formatting link

Hm. Now that I come to think of it, I don't think it will do what you're looking for, after all. Only of use when connecting two devices using a single CAT-5 cable. Still needs two router ports, though.

Reply to
Georg von Krapp

formatting link

Not with gigabit, they won't.

Reply to
Andy Burns

On Wednesday 13 March 2013 22:33 brass monkey wrote in uk.d-i-y:

In that scenario, I *would* daisy chain the gig switches, otherwise, as you noted in another post, you would have a 100mbit constriction between them.

But an 8 port would be neater...

Reply to
Tim Watts

On Thursday 14 March 2013 07:36 Andy Burns wrote in uk.d-i-y:

Exaclty - gig needs all 4 pairs. 10/100 uses 2 pairs, allowing the other 2 to be used for another 10/100 circuit or a phone.

Reply to
Tim Watts

It does not really make any difference if you use one or two devices...

If you were using for example 2 smaller gig switches and wanted the best performance on the home segment of the LAN, then you would be actually be better daisy chaining them, and just having a single connection from the first to the 10/100 router. That way all the stuff on the lan can run a gigabit speeds (if it has the capability) without needing to take a trip through the 10/100 switch in the router.

Reply to
John Rumm

Just daisy chain it then.

Reply to
dennis

It should be a 96 GBit/sec core as the network can run in full duplex.

Reply to
dennis

Have you considered buying a managed switch rather than a gigabit hub? A proper managed gigabit switch will set you back more than you would like but there's a halfway house in a web managed switch.

I'd have a look at a Dell PowerConnect 2724. This will give you 24 ports to play with and a range of configuration options. At the simplest level out of the box it's just a 24 port gigabit hub.

If you poke a hidden button it enables a web interface to let you manage the switch via a web browser. With this you can configure port routing and also link aggregation which, if your NAS has twin gigabit ports, will let you double bandwidth (depending on your NAS, but QNAP for example support link aggregation).

Best of all is the price - used examples in good nick can be had for £60ish. Astonishingly good for a 24 port hub, even better when you can flip it into managed mode.

Reply to
Steve Firth

Good idea, Steve. I was interested until I read this -

formatting link

Reply to
brass monkey

The guy is an idiot. Don't just read what he wrote, read the comments below from people who know what they are doing.

His primary complaint about the management IP is wrong. He expected the box to support a telnet console with a serial interface like the Cisco, it doesn't. Once someone had explained how the box works (RTFM!) he apologised for his rant.

Reply to
Steve Firth

What's the configuration system before poking the hidden button?

Unfortunately it's the first Google hit (for me, anyway) for 'dell powerconnect 2724'.

Reply to
Adam Funk

None, before you poke the hidden button it's a 24 port hub, no configuration possible or necessary. It was IIRC Dell's "prosumer" offering. For anyone who doesn't wan't/can't be arsed to set up a managed switch it works as a hub. Plug it in, forget it, no added security or performance features. If you know what you are doing, poke the button and read the manual. Or the other way around.

The hardware is reliable and with several being retired from datacentres at the moment, cheap. A 24 port gigabit hub at £60 or so seems like a bargain to me.

[snip]

Yes, and I've no issue with it, but don't jsut read what he says, which is wrong, continue to the comments below where his problems are addressesed, answered and resolved by people who know what they are talking about.

I'd say that the problem that Dell had with the switch was that they tried to create a new category of device. Before they brought out the PowerConnect range there were home devices (hubs) that offered no management features and manages switches for IT professionals that support IOS or a clone thereof and that were designed to be managed via telnet.

Dell clearly thought that there was a market for a device that fitted in the middle, a SOHO user can buy one, plug stuff in, it works. If later they get a man in or get a clue they can switch on the management features and use them. In an attempt to make that process familiar to the naive user Dell chose the same configuration process that applies to DSL Modems and WiFi routers. Switch on (the managed switch features) and the device offers a management interface on a defined IP address using an embedded web server.

That is clearly unfamiliar to anyone used to Cisco switches who tend to think "get out the blue cable and a laptop running PuTTY" so they bleat that the switch isn't working.

Clearly if turning management features on for the 2724 it's best, as with a home wifi router, to ensure that you connect one PC direct to the switch (only). Then establish some basic security such as changing passwords and giving the device an appropriate IP address then proceed to integrate it into the LAN.

As far as Brassy is concerned, I'm really suggesting buy the device because it's a cheap 24 port gigabit hub. It gives lots of potential for expansion, it's better built than stuff Netgear churn out and it will be cheaper than buying 2x8 port hubs. Also if you ever get fancy it will be there ready to use.

Reply to
Steve Firth

Tsssk, I'm blaming caffeine shortage this time around.

Reply to
Steve Firth

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.