Moving into house wried house: questions

[dlaugh]

Moving into house wired house: questions

I've just bought a house that has Ethernet to essentially every room (assume there are 12 wall jacks). It'll certainly be a technical step up from my current home, an 80 year-old house with ancient wiring and endless wireless dead zones.

Having looked at the set up the current owners have, it appears that they didn't use the wiring much; the cable modem is connected to a 4-port consumer router and the remaining 8 cables are just unconnected. Gotta change that.

So, my plan is to deploy the following:
- 2 computers, both of which will be in one room
- Media storage -- something like a Drobo; location of that can be flexible
- Several connected devices at the main television (TiVo, a connection to the media storage, a Sonos, maybe the TV itself)
- One connected device at 2 additional televisions (likely a connection to the media storage)
- 3-4 Sonos units, in addition to the one with the main television
- A wireless network, using my existing AirPort Extreme + several Airport Express units if necessary to extend the network

So, let's assume that I'm using all 12 jacks, that most of the jacks only have one thing connected, but that a few of the jacks will have 2-4 things connected.

As you might guess from the set-up, the system will be used to distribute video (via media storage to some sort of boxes) and audio (via Sonos) throughout the house, will be used for the two wired computers to connect to the internet, will be used for various wireless devices to connect to the internet, and will be used for a few entertainment devices to connect to the internet (e.g., TiVo to Netflix).

It'll all be connected to a Comcast cable modem. They offer speeds from "up to" 15 Mbps to "up to" 50 Mbps. I'll probably start off with 15 and see how well that serves us.

I'm technically adept, but don't happen to know much about home networking yet.

Is the best solution to simply put the 12 cables into an unmanaged switch, put the switch into a router, and put the router into the cable modem? (Plus some small unmanaged switches at the jacks that need more than one connection.) Will the Airport Extreme be sufficient as the router in those circumstances? Do I gain anything by plugging some connections (e.g., the connection going to the office with the 2 computers) directly into the router, instead of the switch? Do I gain anything by having 2 8-port switches vs. 1 16-port switch? Do I gain anything by using a managed or smart switch (I don't think I'd take advantage of the capabilities..).

Happy to answer any questions to provide better advice.

Thanks!

 

[thiggins]

Is the best solution to simply put the 12 cables into an unmanaged switch, put the switch into a router, and put the router into the cable modem? (Plus some small unmanaged switches at the jacks that need more than one connection.)

That is certainly the simplest way to go.

Will the Airport Extreme be sufficient as the router in those circumstances?

Airport Extreme has plenty of routing throughput (> 300 Mbps each direction, 400 Mbps simultaneous up/down). Depending on size of the home, you may need more wireless APs.

Do I gain anything by plugging some connections (e.g., the connection going to the office with the 2 computers) directly into the router, instead of the switch?

As long as the switches are 10/100/1000, no. Switches will not limit your LAN throughput vs. the Extreme's switch unless they are only 10/100.

Do I gain anything by having 2 8-port switches vs. 1 16-port switch?

You could actually lose something with two switches. If you have > 1000 Mbps (assuming Gigabit switches) of traffic in either direction switch-to-switch then the single 1000 Mbps uplink port could bottleneck you. With a single switch, the switching bandwidth is sufficient to handle all ports simultaneously active.

Do I gain anything by using a managed or smart switch (I don't think I'd take advantage of the capabilities..).

You would gain VLAN and perhaps some QoS bandwidth control (the latter depends on the switch features). Might be useful for separating video and data traffic on the LAN, again if it's very busy. But doesn't sound like there are a lot of simultaneous activities that will be occurring.

 

[dlaugh]

Thanks!

Tremendously helpful, thank you very much. Any recommendations on Gigabit 16 and 4 port switches that would be good for my purposes?

 

[thiggins]

You can buy unmanaged switches based on price, vendor preference and warranty. Note that D-Link has a lifetime warranty on all its switches. NETGEAR has lifetime warranty on its ProSafe switches. Good to consider if you're thinking about Gigabit switches. Higher heat tends to kill some of them early.

 

[[OC]Pik4chu]

Tremendously helpful, thank you very much. Any recommendations on Gigabit 16 and 4 port switches that would be good for my purposes?

The Dell PowerConnect series(27xx/28xx) I really like if you can snag them on deals. Lots of fun features. Otherwise Id go with Linksys or Netgear models.

Also, you may actually lose bandwidth if you plug computers into the switch ports of the router, some of the normal consumer grades just aren't that great. One of those caveats to stuffing multiple roles into one box is things start to suffer. Just get a 16-24 port gigabit switch, plug everything into that then 1 line to the router and you will be golden.

 

[thiggins]

Also, you may actually lose bandwidth if you plug computers into the switch ports of the router, some of the normal consumer grades just aren't that great. One of those caveats to stuffing multiple roles into one box is things start to suffer. Just get a 16-24 port gigabit switch, plug everything into that then 1 line to the router and you will be golden.

I don't see how that would happen. All routers use a separate switch chip, with no CPU involvement. I haven't seen a low port count (4-8) chip yet that has any performance issues. The chips used come from the same manufacturers (Realtek, Marvell, Broadcom, etc.) that make standalone switch devices.

 

[[OC]Pik4chu]

I don't see how that would happen. All routers use a separate switch chip, with no CPU involvement. I haven't seen a low port count (4-8) chip yet that has any performance issues. The chips used come from the same manufacturers (Realtek, Marvell, Broadcom, etc.) that make standalone switch devices.

I have had the issue using a gigabit linksys cable/modem router as well as a dlink, and I have seen several threads where people have gotten faster speeds by buying a separate switch rather than using the included ports. And the fact that its the same chip is exactly the point.

 

[thiggins]

And the fact that its the same chip is exactly the point.

Please explain. I don't understand your point.

 

[[OC]Pik4chu]

Please explain. I don't understand your point.

Same chip has to do more, less efficient at doing it. Its just about the quality of the product. Its just like going from a generic onboard gigabit NIC to an Intel PCIX NIC, dedicated, name brand devices do a better job at their intended function than all-in-ones. It pretty much holds true for any 'all-in-one' solution. There are a number of posts over at the avsforum for instance in their DIY media server section about stuff like this if youd like more information.

The OP may not be using/needing enough bandwidth to notice but if he is going the route of wiring it all up I recommend dedicating the switch to the computers and leave the router/firewall to do its job.

 

[thiggins]

Same chip has to do more, less efficient at doing it. Its just about the quality of the product. Its just like going from a generic onboard gigabit NIC to an Intel PCIX NIC, dedicated, name brand devices do a better job at their intended function than all-in-ones. It pretty much holds true for any 'all-in-one' solution. There are a number of posts over at the avsforum for instance in their DIY media server section about stuff like this if youd like more information.

If it is the same switch chip, whether in a router or in a standalone switch, it will behave the same. LAN to LAN traffic never touches the CPU. So how is the same chip in a switch "doing more"?

Your example comparing an onboard NIC to a PCIX NIC is not an equivalent situation since you are comparing different devices.

 

[[OC]Pik4chu]

If it is the same switch chip, whether in a router or in a standalone switch, it will behave the same. LAN to LAN traffic never touches the CPU. So how is the same chip in a switch "doing more"?

Your example comparing an onboard NIC to a PCIX NIC is not an equivalent situation since you are comparing different devices.

I wasnt comparing the device I was comparing the scenario. All-in-ones Vs dedicated.

And how would Lan-to-LAN traffic never touch the CPU? the router still has to look at the traffic to determine if it goes to the LAN or the WAN therefore that touches the CPU.