Routers + Switches - traffic question

[mjf_uk]

I currently have a Netgear WNDR3800 router. I then have one Netgear GS116E and two Netgear GS108E switches, which are currently wired to separate connections on the router.

As well as a few computers and music streaming devices (plus tablets and phones connecting wirelessly) there are two main rooms with AV systems that are both set up for using streaming services from the internet as well as streaming larger bandwidth files from a NAS sitting on the network - which are very often used at the same time.

I am looking to upgrade my Sky HD to Sky Q and do not want to rely on wireless streaming from the main Sky Q box to the Mini boxes. So 2 more rooms are about to add to the network traffic, as they will be streaming from the main Sky Q box in the larger AV room. These Mini boxes will pretty much be in constant use, also when the main AV systems are in use.

The larger AV room has everything connected to the GS116E, then a 6m cable wired back to the router. This is where the NAS drive is connected. Everything has been running fine in this room and I'd like to make sure it stays that way.

The secondary AV room has a GS108E, with a 35m cable connecting back to the router and only connecting at 100Mbps. There has been a few issues with streaming, so I want to replace the cable to get this switch connecting at 1000Mbps.

The 3rd switch is currently no longer used much, since most of the devices in this room where moved to the larger AV room. This connects back to the router with a 25m cable, also only connecting at 100Mbps. It is positioned around half way inbetween the AV rooms, in relation to the wiring path back to the router.

With all that in mind, I would like to run a 20m cable from one GS108E to the other GS108E, then another 20m cable from that to the GS116E, with the 6m single cable already in place from that to the router.

Am I likely to introduce any problems doing that? Or will it be better to keep all 3 switches wired separately back to the router?

 

[netwrks]

I would connect each switch to a LAN port on the Netgear router.

 

[mjf_uk]

I would connect each switch to a LAN port on the Netgear router.

Thanks for the reply, but why would you do that please?

 

[netwrks]

I prefer direct connect switches, as opposed to daisy chaining switches. One less device hop. Easier to troubleshoot, in the event of an issue.

 

[CaptainSTX]

I prefer direct connect switches, as opposed to daisy chaining switches. One less device hop. Easier to troubleshoot, in the event of an issue.

While as has been stated it would be preferable not to daisy chain the switches if you can get the links between them all working at 1000Mbps you shouldn't saturate the links with video streaming alone. The only scenario that might result in overloading any of the links is if you decided to back up multiple PCs while streaming from multiple video sources to multiple devices. This could be avoided by scheduling backups to occur late at night or during the day when everyone is out of the house.

 

[mjf_uk]

While as has been stated it would be preferable not to daisy chain the switches if you can get the links between them all working at 1000Mbps you shouldn't saturate the links with video streaming alone. The only scenario that might result in overloading any of the links is if you decided to back up multiple PCs while streaming from multiple video sources to multiple devices. This could be avoided by scheduling backups to occur late at night or during the day when everyone is out of the house.

Thanks for this reply.

No backups would be run during video streaming, so I guess I should try it the easy way first and see how it goes. I will then have the option to connect the daisy chained GS108E's direct to the router from the nearer switch, if their traffic affects the larger AV room.

Another thought was that I could LAG from the GS116E to the router, but not sure this will be of any use when my internet connection is currently only around 50Mbps anyway.

 

[System Error Message]

you can run backup and video stream at the same time. LAGG helps with that and a little QoS. If the same server does files and streaming than that server should set the stream to higher priority than files.

 

[mjf_uk]

Are the Netgear Powerline PL1200 adapters worth considering instead of the long cable runs?

 

[degrub]

Are the Netgear Powerline PL1200 adapters worth considering instead of the long cable runs?

depends on the bandwidth needed and what your power wiring will support )noise, connections, etc). Multiple drops will reduce the overall bandwidth if there are mutliple users active. Cable will always beat powerline and wireless and MOCA, but if you have the wiring already, it can be worth a try. I use one pair of the 500 series netgear powerline to stream HD to a TV. It is more than adequate for my purposes. If you can buy, try, and return it's worth a shot versus installing cable.

 

[mjf_uk]

depends on the bandwidth needed and what your power wiring will support )noise, connections, etc). Multiple drops will reduce the overall bandwidth if there are mutliple users active. Cable will always beat powerline and wireless and MOCA, but if you have the wiring already, it can be worth a try. I use one pair of the 500 series netgear powerline to stream HD to a TV. It is more than adequate for my purposes. If you can buy, try, and return it's worth a shot versus installing cable.

Thanks. Like you say, I'll have to try it to know for sure. I think it will help with the Sky Mini boxes for the extra rooms, but I will stick to the plan of re-wiring the main rooms.

 

[Samir]

Are the Netgear Powerline PL1200 adapters worth considering instead of the long cable runs?

A cable will be much, much better. Powerline never comes near the stated bandwidth (just like wifi)

 

[System Error Message]

A cable will be much, much better. Powerline never comes near the stated bandwidth (just like wifi)

You mean ethernet? Cable can also mean coax copper cables you know which also dont compare in performance to ethernet. Theres a reason why some ISPs are called cable and is because they use cables which really arent ethernet.

Not everyone can use ethernet, as some are very bothered by appearance and not everyone can afford to set up ethernet in walls or dont even own the building. Powerline is far from its stated speeds but is more reliable than having the same device receive and retransmit to the main wifi router. A wifi to wifi dedicated bridge with directional antenna performs better than powerline and is more reliable, such as configuration looks like this
[Modem}___{Router]_ethernet_[AP]-- bridge---[AP]_ ethernet_[Normal AP])))) clients
is better than powerline, coax and
[Modem]____[Router])))wifi((([Normal AP]))) clients

For example you may have an asus AC2600 as your main router, you connect a netgear r7000 via ethernet to it, replace the antennas with directional and point it to where you will place to new AP. You than place another netgear r7000 at the location you want the new AP, replace antennas with directional and point it to the netgear r7000 wired to the asus ac2600 and set them up to bridge. You then connect the AP you want such as the AC3200 to the netgear r7000 via ethernet. This configuration is much better than powerline but a lot more expensive but will give you better latency and speed. For instance in a small house my tp link AV2000 gets only 200Mb/s from testing (utility reports more but tp link utility is garbage). Wifi practical rates on a good day (which will always be so for dedicated wifi bridges with directional antennas) will be around 60% of link speed. That means that if the bridge links up at full speed (1299Mb/s) than you should expect around 700Mb/s-800Mb/s, many times faster than powerline but it also costs a lot more as well but still cheaper in price/performance for what you can get (such as using mikrotik RB 9xx series). The latency at idle for powerline is 2ms, for wifi it is 1ms if well configured and <1ms if well configured and high end. On partial load the latency for powerline is 5ms, for wifi it should be lower, this is if wifi is dedicated bridge.

Cost wise the tp link av2000 costs £94 on amazon and will give you at best 400Mb/s. 2x RB9xx dual chain wifi AC costs $160 + 2x PSUs + 2 cases + 4 directional antennas which can cost 3x the cost of the PLA but will give you 400Mb/s at distances where the PLA will give you 50Mb/s. Another setup is to get the hEX 2x RB9xx with mini PCIe + 2x cards + 4x directional + 6x omni totalling to $60 + $200 + 2 PSUs + 4 directional antennas + 6 omni antennas + 2 cases. Total cost should be less than $400, cheaper than using the equivalent consumer routers for this dedicated wifi bridge setup not to mention mikrotik can both bridge and spread wifi using 2 physically seperate radios on the same device and also bridge using 2.4Ghz at the same time. I sure someone may be interested in giving this a try not to mention that you can attach a raspberry pi on the usb port of the hEX. When i have time and get myself on the hands of some mikrotik RB APs with antennas i could test and show how practical/impractical it is compared to powerline.

 

[Samir]

You mean ethernet? Cable can also mean coax copper cables you know which also dont compare in performance to ethernet. Theres a reason why some ISPs are called cable and is because they use cables which really arent ethernet.

Not everyone can use ethernet, as some are very bothered by appearance and not everyone can afford to set up ethernet in walls or dont even own the building. Powerline is far from its stated speeds but is more reliable than having the same device receive and retransmit to the main wifi router. A wifi to wifi dedicated bridge with directional antenna performs better than powerline and is more reliable, such as configuration looks like this
[Modem}___{Router]_ethernet_[AP]-- bridge---[AP]_ ethernet_[Normal AP])))) clients
is better than powerline, coax and
[Modem]____[Router])))wifi((([Normal AP]))) clients

For example you may have an asus AC2600 as your main router, you connect a netgear r7000 via ethernet to it, replace the antennas with directional and point it to where you will place to new AP. You than place another netgear r7000 at the location you want the new AP, replace antennas with directional and point it to the netgear r7000 wired to the asus ac2600 and set them up to bridge. You then connect the AP you want such as the AC3200 to the netgear r7000 via ethernet. This configuration is much better than powerline but a lot more expensive but will give you better latency and speed. For instance in a small house my tp link AV2000 gets only 200Mb/s from testing (utility reports more but tp link utility is garbage). Wifi practical rates on a good day (which will always be so for dedicated wifi bridges with directional antennas) will be around 60% of link speed. That means that if the bridge links up at full speed (1299Mb/s) than you should expect around 700Mb/s-800Mb/s, many times faster than powerline but it also costs a lot more as well but still cheaper in price/performance for what you can get (such as using mikrotik RB 9xx series). The latency at idle for powerline is 2ms, for wifi it is 1ms if well configured and <1ms if well configured and high end. On partial load the latency for powerline is 5ms, for wifi it should be lower, this is if wifi is dedicated bridge.

Cost wise the tp link av2000 costs £94 on amazon and will give you at best 400Mb/s. 2x RB9xx dual chain wifi AC costs $160 + 2x PSUs + 2 cases + 4 directional antennas which can cost 3x the cost of the PLA but will give you 400Mb/s at distances where the PLA will give you 50Mb/s. Another setup is to get the hEX 2x RB9xx with mini PCIe + 2x cards + 4x directional + 6x omni totalling to $60 + $200 + 2 PSUs + 4 directional antennas + 6 omni antennas + 2 cases. Total cost should be less than $400, cheaper than using the equivalent consumer routers for this dedicated wifi bridge setup not to mention mikrotik can both bridge and spread wifi using 2 physically seperate radios on the same device and also bridge using 2.4Ghz at the same time. I sure someone may be interested in giving this a try not to mention that you can attach a raspberry pi on the usb port of the hEX. When i have time and get myself on the hands of some mikrotik RB APs with antennas i could test and show how practical/impractical it is compared to powerline.

Coax was one of the original formats of ethernet as 10base-2, and modern moca 2.0 adapters work very well at blowing away wifi and powerline speeds. Even other wired solutions like those that use a single pair of phone wire will get more consistent speeds than powerline.

As far as a wifi bridge outperforming powerline, I'd have to see this myself as ping times on wifi get horrible when there's interference whereas they remain fair consistent on powerline when there isn't interference on the power line (which is most of the time).

Wifi has its place end edge connectivity, but it's not the backbone for a reason, and those reasons are many.

 

[System Error Message]

Coax was one of the original formats of ethernet as 10base-2, and modern moca 2.0 adapters work very well at blowing away wifi and powerline speeds. Even other wired solutions like those that use a single pair of phone wire will get more consistent speeds than powerline.

As far as a wifi bridge outperforming powerline, I'd have to see this myself as ping times on wifi get horrible when there's interference whereas they remain fair consistent on powerline when there isn't interference on the power line (which is most of the time).

Wifi has its place end edge connectivity, but it's not the backbone for a reason, and those reasons are many.

I've seen the wifi vs powerline latency comparisons before. With directional antennas the signal to noise ratio will be greatly improved, this is different from a bridge using omni antennas sharing the same space. This specific scenario was comparing using wifi to an AP and powerline for bridge comparing to a dedicated wifi bridge with an AP behind as well. If you plug ethernet in both cases on both ends for the test, thats how to test it. People have used wifi APs with directional antennas/dishes for extremely long range wifi so at a shorter range going through a few walls that should still give decent speeds as well. This is specifically why i said directional antennas as it means a huge difference in SnR so interference should be insignificant.

In terms of latency wifi actually travels at the speed of light so it has the potential to be faster and interference happens on all mediums but the SnR on cables is usually much much better than wifi which is why 100Gb/s wired links exist. cables being fiber optics for instance. This is why latency on powerline tends to be more stable than wifi but in the case with directional antennas the SnR is very good so it would mean less waiting or re-transmissions meaning less latency. I once tried to push as much data as i could through wifi and ended up with some packet drops so its more of a question of how much of the link is being used. Since 60% is easily achievable with good SnR on wifi compared to powerline dedicated wifi bridges may be a better choice. If you load powerline the same way it tends to handle it a bit better but the latency also gets unstable, this is where we get practical speeds. Getting 200Mb/s out of the rated 600+Mb/s that the utility shows it connected at means that some transport mechanism in the standard handles the overwhelming traffic much better than wifi does which is what makes up for the difference and stability in latency and its also because that powerline is shared much less than wifi in the same area.

moca which is based on the usual coax by cable companies has had protocols that work on a few Gb/s and because its cable it has better SnR than regular wifi. The difference however is how it is used, whether it is shared or point to point, just like the difference between an ethernet switch and hub/bus. With wifi dedicated bridging with directional is the equivalent of a point to point connection but you dont get as many radios on APs as you do for ports on an ethernet switch.So if an AP had 20 radius all for used with dedicated bridging with directional antennas with each radio being 4x4 it would already exceed gigabit switches but that would be both bulky and poses design difficulties because of the interference as every signal uses more watts than on ethernet.

 

[Samir]

Your points are definitely valid, but for most plain-jane end users, wifi will always be secondary to any wired medium. The tuning of directional antennas can be well beyond most people's patience.