Help Optimising network hardware / connections

[old.user4556]

All,

Looking for some advice on arranging the best way for all my network connections so that they work to the best of their ability without any undue lame performance due to my n00bness.

Currently I have:

- a Sky wireless ADSL router with four ethernet ports

This lives in my cupboard by the master BT socket. I connect at around 8 megabits and I get a steady 820 k/bytes from good servers.

Via ethernet, I have connected:

- 1 PS3
- 1 PC (my main workhorse PC)
- 1 Netgear ReadyNAS (currently hosts all my music, will be video eventually)

Via wireless, I have connected:

- iPhone 4 (light use, pickup emails and refreshing facebook)
- wife's laptop (mainly web browsing, some email and rarely streaming iPlayer)

I will be looking to expand my music streaming system to encompass a Sonos system which will involve plugging in a Sonos ZoneBridge into the Sky Router thus using all the available slots on the Router.

My questions are:

- is having the four all plugged in wise given that more than one PC may be streaming music from the NAS drive?
- would it be better to invest in a switch or hub and then plug that into the Sky Router?
- is my existing setup perhaps already inefficient and could use some 'partitioning'?

Any advice most welcome.

 

[Zenith.UK]

This is the topology of my home network. It's just like yours, but with a switch in-line between the router and the rest of the LAN.

Line -- Router <<<< wifi >>>> { Mobile phone x2, Wife's laptop,
          |                   { Eldest's netbook & other guest devices
    5 port Switch
          |
          |---- Media PC / File Server
          |---- Download Mill
          |---- My laptop
          |---- PS3

Switch is only 100Mbit on ethernet and the router is 802.11g (54Mbit) on wifi.
I'm going to be rearranging the lounge this summer and will need to consider the placement of trunking, cabling and the benefit of cat6 cable vs powerline adaptors.

In answer to your questions:
1) Shouldn't be a problem using all the ports of your router. There is nothing stopping you using all the ports, or putting a switch in-line. On a personal preference, I use a switch so that I have one cable from A to B instead of 4.
2) See above.
3) No real "inefficiency" in your topology. The prime benefit of having a modern switch on the wired LAN is to bump your wired speeds from 100Mbit to 1000Mbit (1Gbit). That will give you MORE than enough overhead for the NAS to stream to multiple machines.

 

[Ch3tan]

Switch is what I'm doing g, it will give you the extra capacity and bandwidth for your LAN, and won't affect your Internet speeds in any way.

 

[GimmlyThe3rd]

To put it simply, you don't need a switch unless you plan on using more than 4 and speeds faster than 100mb/s. Everyone calls the home / small office hubs routers these days but really its a router with a built in switch for home use. If you look in a proper network they will use lots of stand alone switchs and routers (which are only for routing suprising ) .

So no don't waste your money unless you need more ports or speed. Sky routers are also fine and I quite like them for home use but they are only 100mb/s. You can get routers with built in gigabit switches though.

But do you really need more than 100mb/s and a extra box?

 

[Ch3tan]

Ignore all the bollocks you've read, to put it simply, you don't need a switch unless you plan on using more than 4. Everyone calls the home / small office hubs routers these days but really its a router with a built in switch for home use. If you look in a proper network they will use lots of stand alone switchs and routers (which are only for routing suprising ) .

So no don't waste your money unless you need more ports. Sky routers are also fine and I quite like them for home use. They are just flashed netgears and the firmware isn't bad.

Encase you don't believe me and you've read some bollocks on the internet.I'm CCNA certified and was doing a degree in Network Security before I left the UK

Unless his router is 100mbit instead of 1gbit, which will make a difference to his LAN speeds. Especially considering the media server he's set up.

If his router is already 1gbit then yes, it won't make a difference, except as Zenith correctly pointed out, to his cabling. Which is a key factor for home networks.

My sky router for example is only 100mbit, it's currently situated one extension away from the master socket. I can't have 4 lots of ethernet cabling routed through 3 rooms to get the router closer to the master socket. I can have one or a powerline adaptor kit though, and a switch near my equipment.


On a related note, how are powerline kits for latency?

 

[GimmlyThe3rd]

Unless his router is 100mbit instead of 1gbit, which will make a difference to his LAN speeds. Especially considering the media server he's set up.

If his router is already 1gbit then yes, it won't make a difference, except as Zenith correctly pointed out, to his cabling. Which is a key factor for home networks.

My sky router for example is only 100mbit, it's currently situated one extension away from the master socket. I can't have 4 lots of ethernet cabling routed through 3 rooms to get the router closer to the master socket. I can have one or a powerline adaptor kit though, and a switch near my equipment.


On a related note, how are powerline kits for latency?

Already Ninja edited, I forgot sky was 100mbit (but shit they are free ), mine is 1gigabit

Personally I don't like powerline adapter's, I just think they are a last resort kinda thing. With the wireless N nowadays, I'd rather have multiple APs. If cabling wasn't an option, however the houses in the UK are pretty shit for wifi, especially the older built ones. But the new N standard is pretty damn good and is only getting better.

Do not use WEP though, few weeks ago I wanted to see how strong my neighbour's password was so I could get free wifi by the pool

Not so strong ;p

 

[Ch3tan]

Hold on you are telling me to use wireless from my router to my switch rather than powerline? And you claim to be doing a CCNA?

 

[GimmlyThe3rd]

Hold on you are telling me to use wireless from my router to my switch rather than powerline? And you claim to be doing a CCNA?

I'm not studying for a CCNA, I've had a CCNA for 3 years, and they are pretty easy to get. If you can deal with configing a cisco router, a CCNP is the big boy.

I didn't mention anything about a switch, I mentioned a router on the master socket and multiple wifi APs with using standard N. Rather than a power-line and a additional switch, which I think is pretty pants.

"My sky router for example is only 100mbit, it's currently situated one extension away from the master socket. I can't have 4 lots of ethernet cabling routed through 3 rooms to get the router closer to the master socket. I can have one or a powerline adaptor kit though, and a switch near my equipment."

You never said what your "equipment" is, I presumed, PCs / Laptops / etc with wifi.

 

[Ch3tan]

I stream over my home network, I'm not paying for multiple AP's and having to rely on lower speeds from wifi.

My only question was what the latency is like on powerline.

 

[MYstIC G]

Via ethernet, I have connected:

- 1 PS3
- 1 PC (my main workhorse PC)
- 1 Netgear ReadyNAS (currently hosts all my music, will be video eventually)

Via wireless, I have connected:

- iPhone 4 (light use, pickup emails and refreshing facebook)
- wife's laptop (mainly web browsing, some email and rarely streaming iPlayer)

I don't see any point making any significant changes. You could always connect the PS3 by Wi-Fi in future if you're desperate to free up another router socket. I don't think the ReadyNAS does more than 100mb unless you've got an expensive model (I thought you had a Duo?).

 

[GimmlyThe3rd]

I stream over my home network, I'm not paying for multiple AP's and having to rely on lower speeds from wifi.

My only question was what the latency is like on powerline.

What do you stream? You can get speeds of 300+mb/s with 802.11n

Latency sucks, it's ok web surfing or whatever but high bandwidth apps and streaming will suck. It's a nice gadget but doesn't compare to cables and todays wifi.

 

[soze]

I run a power-line to a switch in the room where most of my equipment is. It only needs to bring the internet (20 meg) to the switch so it is fine. I tried using a wireless bridge on the switch but it was far to slow. Even with wireless N by the time all the phones ect (we have between 8-10 wireless devices on the go) had split the signal it was no good. I am much happier with how it works now over the power-line adaptors.

 

[old.user4556]

Switch is what I'm doing g, it will give you the extra capacity and bandwidth for your LAN, and won't affect your Internet speeds in any way.

To put it simply, you don't need a switch unless you plan on using more than 4 and speeds faster than 100mb/s. Everyone calls the home / small office hubs routers these days but really its a router with a built in switch for home use. If you look in a proper network they will use lots of stand alone switchs and routers (which are only for routing suprising ) .

So no don't waste your money unless you need more ports or speed. Sky routers are also fine and I quite like them for home use but they are only 100mb/s. You can get routers with built in gigabit switches though.

But do you really need more than 100mb/s and a extra box?

Good musings on this thread, thanks guys.

I suspect I may want to expand to gigabit ethernet eventually between a couple of desktop PCs, but you're right in that 100 mb/s will be fine for me just now.

 

[MYstIC G]

The ReadyNAS will not be able to pulp your Sky router. You're better off buying the Cat5 cable.

 

[Lamp]

Bugger. Need Linux for aircrack

 

[Embattle]

Had no latency issues myself when I ran powerline networking, then it tends to vary house to house to some degree.

My current setup is:

Billion BiPAC 7800N

Via Gigabit Ethernet:

-1 PC
-Synology 410

Via Wireless N:

-4 Phones
-3 Laptops
-1 Tablet
-1 PS3
-1 Wii
-2 DS
-1 Printer

All the wireless stuff never tends to all run at same time but everything works fine.

 

[old.user4556]

I had streaming issues with the PS3 and wireless so went wired.

 

[MYstIC G]

Strange that, from the ReadyNAS?

 

[TdC]

I had streaming issues with the PS3 and wireless so went wired.

what kind of issue bud? for myself, I had a shit time trying to stream high rez mkv to my ps/3 across a 54Mbit wireless lan, but horses for courses. 300MBit wireless N now and all is frigging sweet.

 

[Zenith.UK]

Had no latency issues myself when I ran powerline networking, then it tends to vary house to house to some degree.

My current setup is:

Billion BiPAC 7800N

Maybe you can answer a couple of questions about that router for me.

Are you able to allow or deny individual devices to access the wifi?
And are you able to allow or deny individual devices access to the WAN (Internet)?
I'm after a router that has that level of granular access control.

 

[Embattle]

Personally never used them yet, it has mountains of options and gets regular firmware updates and imo has been my best router by far. The sections are as follows:

Basic

Status

ADSL Status, WAN Statistics, ARP Table, DHCP Table, System Log, Firewall Log, UPnP Portmap, PPTP Status

Quick Start

Configuration

LAN - Ethernet, IP Alias, IPv6 Autoconfig, Wireless, Wireless Security, WPS, DHCP Server

WAN - WAN Interface, WAN Profile, ADSL Mode

System - Time Zone, Firmware Upgrade, Backup/Restore, Restart, User Management, Syslog, Diagnostics Tools

Firewall - Packet Filter, Ethernet MAC Filter, Wireless MAC Filter, Intrusion Detection, Black WAN Ping, URL Filter

VPN - PPTP, PPTP Account, PPTP Client

QoS

Virual Server - Port Mapping, DMZ, One-to-One NAT, ALG

Wake on LAN

Time Schedule

Advanced - Static Route, Static ARP, Static DNS, Dynamic DNS, VLAN, Device Management, IGMP, MLD, SNMP Access Control, Remote Access, Web Access Control

If you want to see any of these windows let me know

 

[GimmlyThe3rd]

I'm guessing he wants to deny access to all macs apart from the ones in his list for security measures. I'd guess that it would be in Wireless MAC Filter or failing that, device management.

 

[Ch3tan]

All my netgear routers have allowed my a mac access control list for wifi, thought it was a standard option?

 

[GimmlyThe3rd]

All my netgear routers have allowed my a mac access control list for wifi, thought it was a standard option?

Not on the cheaper ones, netgear have really nice firmware for it too imo.

Can never go wrong with Netgear / Linksys and D-Link for home networking imo.

 

[Zenith.UK]

I'm guessing he wants to deny access to all macs apart from the ones in his list for security measures. I'd guess that it would be in Wireless MAC Filter or failing that, device management.

Yes and no.
Yes, I want to limit access those devices I personally allow. Pretty much all routers have this capability to a greater or lesser degree.
However, I also want to be able to cut off eldest daughter's netbook from the net, but keep the wifi going. There are times when I don't want her on FB/YT/IMVU but I don't mind her streaming from the media PC on the LAN.

 

[old.user4556]

Strange that, from the ReadyNAS?

what kind of issue bud? for myself, I had a shit time trying to stream high rez mkv to my ps/3 across a 54Mbit wireless lan, but horses for courses. 300MBit wireless N now and all is frigging sweet.

It was when I was running PS3 media server and / or Tversity - I would regularly get something like 'media protocol error' and random disconnects on the PS3 via WiFi. Video streaming was also touch and go even with 720p.

I eventually got fed up and decided to run a length of Cat5 and all has been perfect.

 

[Ch3tan]

Yeah 1080p streaming, even on wireless n is hit and miss. Cable is the way to go there.

 

[MYstIC G]

It was when I was running PS3 media server and / or Tversity - I would regularly get something like 'media protocol error' and random disconnects on the PS3 via WiFi. Video streaming was also touch and go even with 720p.

I eventually got fed up and decided to run a length of Cat5 and all has been perfect.

Cable is, as has been said though, always the better option. I'm guessing you were running PS3MS or Tversity on the PC then? That would effectively have doubled up your traffic, i.e.: ReadyNAS -> Router -> PC -> Router (Wifi) -> PS3

 

[Ch3tan]

He only just got the readyNAS (or ordered it), so he would only have been doing pc>router >wifi > ps3.

Which is what I did, it couldn't cope with 1080.

 

[old.user4556]

Cable is, as has been said though, always the better option. I'm guessing you were running PS3MS or Tversity on the PC then? That would effectively have doubled up your traffic, i.e.: ReadyNAS -> Router -> PC -> Router (Wifi) -> PS3

He only just got the readyNAS (or ordered it), so he would only have been doing pc>router >wifi > ps3.

Which is what I did, it couldn't cope with 1080.

Yeah what Chet said.

I used to run my main PC with PS3 Media Server or TVersity, so:

PC -> Router -> (wireless) PS3

I switched to:

PC -> Router -> (wired) PS3

All the media was stored on my PC.

My new arrangement will have everything stored on the ReadyNAS with the Sonos ZonePlayer streaming music, but still the main PC used for streaming video (True Blood soon ).