Hub and Router 4

[Rickg47]

Home network. I have 5 rooms that were prewired back to main
box in basement with 6 port patch panel. I want to connect all rooms to 1 internet service. However in 1 room I need 2 internet connections(totally finished so adding is not viable).I have a cable modem and router giving me 2 internet connections in that room. Which would work the best
sending 1 router port to the patch panel in the basement, then thru a 4 port ethernet switch to the other 4 rooms and then using 2 ports off the router for my 2 connections in the room OR moving the modem and router to the patch panel in the basement ,feed all the rooms off the router and splitting the connection with a hub or ethernet switch in the room I need 2 connections? Hope that makes sense?

 

[Sympology]

Do you already have the switch?

If not get an 8 port and bang everything in the basement.

Otherwise I'd do the 1st option.

2 feeds direct into one room, then feed to basement and into switch.

To be honest, it will make little difference at home. Go with what is easiest for you.



Most people spend their time on the "urgent" rather than on the "important."

 

[Grenage]

Second option sounds like it might be simpler. You "could" use one network cable to run two connections by splitting the pairs off, but it'd not recommend it. You could also use your existing cable as a pull-cord to get a couple of new cables up there, but if you're happy with another switch, that will work fine.

"We can categorically state that we have not released man-eating badgers into the area" - Major Mike Shearer

 

[gbaughma]

Splitting the pairs is always asking for trouble.

And splitting the pairs won't work if you ever decide to go Gigabit (which uses all 8 wires).



Just my 2¢

"What the captain doesn't realize is that we've secretly replaced his Dilithium Crystals with new Folger's Crystals."

--Greg

http://parallel.tzo.com

 

[wahnula]

On the topic of hub vs. switch, choose the switch. Hubs are almost extinct, but you could end up with one if you're not careful.

I like keeping all my hubs/routers/modems/WAPS in one place, but that doesn't seem possible here. I guess I'd locate the modem in the most convenient spot and go from there. You WILL need to access the modem from time to time, that might mean the upstairs might be a better location for that.

Hats off to you for pre-wiring the house!

Tony

Users helping Users...

 

[Rickg47]

Thanks for all your input.I ended up leaving the cable modem
and router in the room & taking port 1 from the router to the cat5e outlet, feeding it back to the com box into a 4 port ethernet switch.I then patched the four ports of the internet switch to the other 4 rooms.The PC in the room with cable modem & router is off the 2nd port of the router.Seems to be working quite well, a heck of a lot better that wireless.

Thxs Rick

 

[wahnula]

Make sure you disable DHCP on the switch, otherwise you might end up with IP address conflicts. This way all PCs will pull their IP addresses from one place, the router. Thanks for the star!

Tony

Users helping Users...

 

[manhunter2826]

On the topic of hub vs. switch, choose the switch. Hubs are almost extinct, but you could end up with one if you're not careful.

Don't take this as a criticism - it's not intended to be - as I am always trying to learn here myself. Is it not the case that in some situations hubs are a better choice. I was told once that, in situations where you don't need a high level of complexity in your network (i.e. in a particular place in your network), a hub would be a better alternative. I'm talking about a mixture of hubs and switches here, in one's network (obviously switches take precedence!). I'm probably not wording this particularly well but, if this is indeed the case, I would appreciate folk's comments/suggestions.

 

[BadBigBen]

I was told once that, in situations where you don't need a high level of complexity in your network (i.e. in a particular place in your network), a hub would be a better alternative.

That came from the time where Switches cost a fortune and hubs where dirt cheap...

With Hubs all attached network devices are in the same collision domain, where as with a switch each attached network device is in its own collision domain (or better said NO collision domain)...

If you have 4 computers A/B/C/D on 4 switch ports, then A and B can transfer data between them as well as C and D at the same time, and they will never interfere with each others' conversations. In the case of a "hub" then they would all have to share the bandwidth, run in half-duplex and there would be collisions and retransmissions. Using a switch is called micro-segmentation. It allows you to have dedicated bandwidth on point to point connections with every computer and to therefore run in full duplex with no collisions.

Source: Network Switch Wikipedia

Ben

"If it works don't fix it! If it doesn't use a sledgehammer..."

How to ask a question, when posting them to a professional forum.

 

[manhunter2826]

Thanks BigBB

 

[Sympology]

I will add to this.

There are cases where a cheap hub is better than a cheap switch and that's where you are trying to packet sniff your traffic as a whole (in stead of individual devices).

Expensive switches get around this by adding features sucj as port mirroring.

But for the majority of people, you don't need this.

Most people spend their time on the "urgent" rather than on the "important."

 

[Grenage]

Yup, always handy to have one of those old tiny Netgear switches to hand.

"We can categorically state that we have not released man-eating badgers into the area" - Major Mike Shearer