David M wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 14:22:30 -0400, "Soyrunner" <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>
>
>>My network is 4 systems to a hub. 1 of those 4 is my gateway to a
>>cable-modem. The ISP looks for the gateway's MAC address. I'm using MASQ
>>for access to the web and Apache allows access to the gateway web page. I
>>also use port forwarding to one of the local machines for a personal BBS
>>(PHPBB). I have a single IP.
>>
>>Net activity on the machines is mostly internet radio streaming on one to
>>sound-recorder & lame on another of news and programming to mp3 for the
>>hours I'm out running.
>>
>>I wonder about packet collisions at the hub slowing the network down and am
>>considering one of the cheap D-Link routers I see on ebay (cost is a very
>>real issue). If I access many web pages while recording is going on I seem
>>to miss packets.
>>
>>Would a change to a cheap router be a significant improvement over a hub
>>for my purposes? Thanks for any useful advice here.
>>
>>Bill
>>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> What you require is a switch which just drops in place of the hub.
>
> A switch partitions the dataflows between workstations so that only the
> workstations communicating directly with each other see the data that they
> are exchanging. Multiple dataflows can take place on a single switch at the
> same time without interference such as collisions.
>
> Unless you intend to replace the gateway machine with a router, then a
> router will not be of much use. In this case pick a router with at least a
> four port switch on the LAN side.
>
> Switches in general are usually much faster than routers since they work on
> MAC addresses, not IP addresses.
hmm.. don't switches route the appropriate packet to the switch port?
while switches dont route on IP addresses they still have to build a
table of MAC addresses to switchports. latency will appear if oodles of
busy machines are on the switch and depending on type of switching;
store and forward, cut-through, etc... it's true that the collision
light on the repeater/hub will produce sun-burn from the LED if oodles
of busy machines are speaking all at the same time. in theory there
would be very little collisions on a one-way transmission to one other
host on that same hub, but i don't want start that argument as that can
start a flame war pretty quickly ;-).
then again for light to somewhat busy home usage would moot my point as
transfer rates would be painfully fast and unnoticeable latency.
>
> You should look to see that any switch you may buy supports at least 10/100
> full duplex which will mean that there should be no collisions.
>
agreed. if the user wants to better his LAN performance then a full
duplex scheme would rule. getting a 100meg switch that does not support
full duplex would be kind of defeating the purpose. if price is an
issue, i havent seen a cheapo 100 meg switch that included full duplex
that's in the price range of a combo router/hub from Linksys, NetGear,
etc... or maybe i've been brainwashed by Cisco prices too long :-).
|
Similar Threads
Linear Mode
