planning a wired LAN on 2 floors

Hello,

I am planning the new house's LAN and I have to find a good compromise
between lots of cables or a lot of devices.

My ISP brings optical fibre to our home, and the optical signal is
transduced to DVB-C for the TV and a Zyxel ES315-F switch transform the
signal to a standard Ethernet 100Mbit network.

I am planning to install a router after the Zyxel switch, to provide
DHCP/NAT and firewall, and connect an unmanaged layer 2 16-port Gbit
switch (Switch A) after that and place Cat6 cables to 14 RJ45 plugs in
the walls of the first floor.

Wiring the second floor is my problem. Should I rather opt for a 36 or
48 port switch A downstairs and make the whole network as a star, or can
I put a second switch (Switch B) connected to switch A and make a second
"star" upstairs ?

If I put a switch on each floor, should both of them be separately
connected to my router, or should they be daisy-chained ? I want my
upstairs computers to get media files from the file server downstairs
through at maximal speed.

24 port Gbit switches cost about 100 euros (TP-link, D-Link), while
48-port switches cost as much as 450 euros, and a star-shaped network
with a single switch would need much more Cat6 cable.

What would be a good design for my home ?

Thanks, Lorenzo

On 02/01/11 11:32, Lorenzo Sandini wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I am planning the new house's LAN and I have to find a good compromise
> between lots of cables or a lot of devices.
>
> My ISP brings optical fibre to our home, and the optical signal is
> transduced to DVB-C for the TV and a Zyxel ES315-F switch transform the
> signal to a standard Ethernet 100Mbit network.
>
> I am planning to install a router after the Zyxel switch, to provide
> DHCP/NAT and firewall, and connect an unmanaged layer 2 16-port Gbit
> switch (Switch A) after that and place Cat6 cables to 14 RJ45 plugs in
> the walls of the first floor.
>
> Wiring the second floor is my problem. Should I rather opt for a 36 or
> 48 port switch A downstairs and make the whole network as a star, or can
> I put a second switch (Switch B) connected to switch A and make a second
> "star" upstairs ?

Yes you can do that. All gigabit switches are auto-sensing on all ports
so you can daisy-chain the upstairs switch by connecting it to any spare
port on the downstairs one, you don't need to use a crossover connection.

>
> If I put a switch on each floor, should both of them be separately
> connected to my router, or should they be daisy-chained ? I want my
> upstairs computers to get media files from the file server downstairs
> through at maximal speed.

They should be daisy-chained. If you connect them separately to the
router then you will only have a 100Mb connection between machines on
switch A and machines on switch B.



--
Bernard Peek
(E-Mail Removed)

On 1/2/2011 7:34 AM, Bernard Peek wrote:
> On 02/01/11 11:32, Lorenzo Sandini wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I am planning the new house's LAN and I have to find a good compromise
>> between lots of cables or a lot of devices.
>>
>> My ISP brings optical fibre to our home, and the optical signal is
>> transduced to DVB-C for the TV and a Zyxel ES315-F switch transform the
>> signal to a standard Ethernet 100Mbit network.
>>
>> I am planning to install a router after the Zyxel switch, to provide
>> DHCP/NAT and firewall, and connect an unmanaged layer 2 16-port Gbit
>> switch (Switch A) after that and place Cat6 cables to 14 RJ45 plugs in
>> the walls of the first floor.
>>
>> Wiring the second floor is my problem. Should I rather opt for a 36 or
>> 48 port switch A downstairs and make the whole network as a star, or can
>> I put a second switch (Switch B) connected to switch A and make a second
>> "star" upstairs ?
>
> Yes you can do that. All gigabit switches are auto-sensing on all ports
> so you can daisy-chain the upstairs switch by connecting it to any spare
> port on the downstairs one, you don't need to use a crossover connection.
>
>>
>> If I put a switch on each floor, should both of them be separately
>> connected to my router, or should they be daisy-chained ? I want my
>> upstairs computers to get media files from the file server downstairs
>> through at maximal speed.
>
> They should be daisy-chained. If you connect them separately to the
> router then you will only have a 100Mb connection between machines on
> switch A and machines on switch B.
>
>
>
What I like to do with new houses is to put the router and switches in
the basement and run the cheap flexible (low voltage) plastic conduit to
all the Ethernet locations. Most home centers have the flexible low
voltage conduit, outlet boxes, and connectors to do this. I have even
seen this done using plastic irrigation tubing so as to eliminate the
connections between individual plastic conduit sections.

This gives me a home run for all the ethernet outlets to the central
location in the basement where I have also added a couple of outlets to
power any router, switches, or other equipment needed to connect to the
outside world.

You should have no problem with cable lengths in a private home using a
central location like a basement for all your router/switch equipment
and have no need for a switch on the second floor.

Using the low voltage conduit also allows you to later replace a
defective cable or upgrade to fiber should it become the "standard".

Using an additional switch on the second floor requires the use of an
outlet as well as room for the Ethernet cables. Too many times I've
seen people try to stick a switch in a closet to hide it and the cables
only to later have clothing cover it and cause it to over heat and burn out.

2.1.2011 17:00, GlowingBlueMist kirjoitti:
> On 1/2/2011 7:34 AM, Bernard Peek wrote:
>> On 02/01/11 11:32, Lorenzo Sandini wrote:
>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I am planning the new house's LAN and I have to find a good compromise
>>> between lots of cables or a lot of devices.
>>>
>>> My ISP brings optical fibre to our home, and the optical signal is
>>> transduced to DVB-C for the TV and a Zyxel ES315-F switch transform the
>>> signal to a standard Ethernet 100Mbit network.
>>>
>>> I am planning to install a router after the Zyxel switch, to provide
>>> DHCP/NAT and firewall, and connect an unmanaged layer 2 16-port Gbit
>>> switch (Switch A) after that and place Cat6 cables to 14 RJ45 plugs in
>>> the walls of the first floor.
>>>
>>> Wiring the second floor is my problem. Should I rather opt for a 36 or
>>> 48 port switch A downstairs and make the whole network as a star, or can
>>> I put a second switch (Switch B) connected to switch A and make a second
>>> "star" upstairs ?
>>
>> Yes you can do that. All gigabit switches are auto-sensing on all ports
>> so you can daisy-chain the upstairs switch by connecting it to any spare
>> port on the downstairs one, you don't need to use a crossover connection.
>>
>>>
>>> If I put a switch on each floor, should both of them be separately
>>> connected to my router, or should they be daisy-chained ? I want my
>>> upstairs computers to get media files from the file server downstairs
>>> through at maximal speed.
>>
>> They should be daisy-chained. If you connect them separately to the
>> router then you will only have a 100Mb connection between machines on
>> switch A and machines on switch B.
>>
>>
>>
> What I like to do with new houses is to put the router and switches in
> the basement and run the cheap flexible (low voltage) plastic conduit to
> all the Ethernet locations. Most home centers have the flexible low
> voltage conduit, outlet boxes, and connectors to do this. I have even
> seen this done using plastic irrigation tubing so as to eliminate the
> connections between individual plastic conduit sections.
>
> This gives me a home run for all the ethernet outlets to the central
> location in the basement where I have also added a couple of outlets to
> power any router, switches, or other equipment needed to connect to the
> outside world.
>
> You should have no problem with cable lengths in a private home using a
> central location like a basement for all your router/switch equipment
> and have no need for a switch on the second floor.
>
> Using the low voltage conduit also allows you to later replace a
> defective cable or upgrade to fiber should it become the "standard".
>
> Using an additional switch on the second floor requires the use of an
> outlet as well as room for the Ethernet cables. Too many times I've seen
> people try to stick a switch in a closet to hide it and the cables only
> to later have clothing cover it and cause it to over heat and burn out.


Thank you both for your answers.

Conduits are planned for all the wiring, and a star-shaped network with
one switch only was the original plan. However in case of a switch
failure, the whole network goes down.

In a 2-switch scenario, replacing a switch is less expensive and I still
have a working network on one floor.

The ISP's switch, my router and first switch will be placed on the lower
floor, and I have an office on the second floor, where the second switch
will be placed, and from where the cabling will go the all other rooms.

Especially important is the having the media files on the file server
downstairs streamed to the upper floor rooms. The TP-Link SG1024D seems
to suit my needs and is quite affordable. I have 13 RJ45 plugs
downstairs and 19 plugs upstairs, so the other available ports will be
for wireless access points and occasional use.

Can't wait to start wiring

Any comments about wireless access points are welcome at this point.
I'll have to use different channels on the 2 floors to avoid
interference. It's a concrete building with thick walls (welcome to
scandinavia), and I don't need coverage everywhere, only in a few spots
in the house.

Cheers, Lorenzo

On Sun, 02 Jan 2011 23:23:54 +0200, Lorenzo Sandini
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Conduits are planned for all the wiring, and a star-shaped network with
>one switch only was the original plan. However in case of a switch
>failure, the whole network goes down.
>
>In a 2-switch scenario, replacing a switch is less expensive and I still
>have a working network on one floor.
>
>The ISP's switch, my router and first switch will be placed on the lower
>floor, and I have an office on the second floor, where the second switch
>will be placed, and from where the cabling will go the all other rooms.

Personally, I like the idea of running all the cables to a single
location, regardless of whether that is the first or second floor.
Even with a single central point, you're not limited to using one big
switch. If you'd like, (and I think your reasoning is valid), you can
use a switch for each floor and then trunk them together. If you lose
a switch, you lose a floor, and if it's not the floor you wished you
had lost, you can swap a few cables and presto, that floor is back up
and the other floor is down until you replace the switch.
Realistically, though, it seems rare to lose a switch. I've got half a
dozen switches scattered around the house, (I didn't plan ahead like
you're doing!), and they've been running for years with no problems.

Char Jackson <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
news:(E-Mail Removed):

> On Sun, 02 Jan 2011 23:23:54 +0200, Lorenzo Sandini
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>Conduits are planned for all the wiring, and a star-shaped network
>>with one switch only was the original plan. However in case of a
>>switch failure, the whole network goes down.
>>
>>In a 2-switch scenario, replacing a switch is less expensive and I
>>still have a working network on one floor.
>>
>>The ISP's switch, my router and first switch will be placed on the
>>lower floor, and I have an office on the second floor, where the
>>second switch will be placed, and from where the cabling will go
>>the all other rooms.
>
> Personally, I like the idea of running all the cables to a single
> location, regardless of whether that is the first or second floor.
> Even with a single central point, you're not limited to using one
> big switch. If you'd like, (and I think your reasoning is valid),
> you can use a switch for each floor and then trunk them together.
> If you lose a switch, you lose a floor, and if it's not the floor
> you wished you had lost, you can swap a few cables and presto,
> that floor is back up and the other floor is down until you
> replace the switch. Realistically, though, it seems rare to lose a
> switch. I've got half a dozen switches scattered around the house,
> (I didn't plan ahead like you're doing!), and they've been running
> for years with no problems.
>

I echo the switch faillure comment also.
Our company installed a switched network using all expensive,
commercial
quality switches, originally 10mb speed. As we upgraded to higher
(100) switches, we found that we could purchase a less expensive
quality switch and still have the same failure rate (no failures in
7 years). We now have upgraded to gigabit switches at the lower cost
(not only lower cost because of naturally decreasing price points),
but also less than the best commercially available units. It is
now 9 years later and we have had NO switch failures. We have had a
lot of cable connector problems, mostly at the client end as they
tend be less careful with the cables!