Home Networking/Switch Questions

[Juano11]

Lots of questions here...first some background info...

I'm in the process of having my home wired with Cat5e. Currently, we'll have 14 wired ethernet ports throughout the house. All of the cables terminate in the same area of the basement where the cable modem, router, and switch will be located.

We currently have a 10mbps cable internet connection, but may upgrade to 30mbps in the near future.

Our router is a D-Link DGL-4100 10/100/1000Mbps. I plan on connecting this to a large (probably unmanaged) switch. I'm currently considering either the NETGEAR JGS524 10/100/1000Mbps or D-Link DGS-1024D 10/100/1000Mbps. I have two wireless access points that I plan on connecting directly to the large switch or to extra ports on the router. I also have two D-Link DGS-2208 10/100/1000Mbps 8-Port Switches that will probably be added later if we decide we need more ports in a particular room (wired to the main switch or router, but located in a distant room).

Background info over...I have a few questions...

1. Do you see any obvious problem with this network as described? There shouldn't be any problem connecting the smaller switches downstream from the main switch, correct?

2. Would you recommend one of the switches listed above over the other (or a different one altogether)? I've chosen unmanaged switches because I don't THINK that I need the additional features of a managed or "smart" switch. Additionally, (as you might have guessed) there is much that I don't know regarding networking settings. I'd like it to be pretty much plug and play. Although, I might like a switch that would function like an unmanaged switch out of the box, with the ability to do more advanced configuration as I learn more later. Both of the switches listed above can be had for ~$160, I'd prefer to keep the price below ~$300.

3. My third question, which will surely reveal my ignorance, is this: How should I/can I connect my router to the switch? If I have a single Cat5e/Cat6 cable connecting my router won't that act as a potential bottleneck, since I'd be running all of my internet traffic through a single gigabit port on the router. Is it possible to connect more than one port of the router to the switch and maintain the network's "plug and play" nature? I guess that total bandwith shouldn't be a problem, since my internet connection is only 10-30mbps. However, if more than one connection between router and switch is possible, is there any benefit?

4. Finally, assuming that only one port of the router should be connected to the large switch, how would you suggest that I connect my wireless APs and/or additional 8 port switches? Should I connect as many of them as possible directly to the empty ports on the router, or should I just connect them to the switch as well? Are there benefits to either method? Am I likely to have problems with different network devices "seeing" each other if I connect them one way or the other?

Sorry for the long post and my ignorance.

Many Thanks in advance for your help,

Juan

[Jay_S]

Welcome to the SNB forums.

Originally Posted by Juano11

1. Do you see any obvious problem with this network as described? There shouldn't be any problem connecting the smaller switches downstream from the main switch, correct?

Not really, except that all the devices connected to the down-stream switch have to share a single link to your central switch. All those devices will be able to communicate with each other and with everything else connected up-stream to your main, central switch. The only issue will be reduced performance if/when multiple devices connected to the downstream switch need a lot of network bandwidth to some device(s) connected to the main switch - because they're sharing that single up-link.

BUT, if it's not too late can you cable multiple runs to each location? You're buying a 24pt switch, so why stop at 14? Run two to each room, or several to those rooms where you were considering using the down-stream switches. It's cleaner, keeps all your network infrastructure in 1 spot, and you don't have devices competing for the up-link bandwidth. Cable and keystones are cheap now, expensive to add later.

Originally Posted by Juano11

2. I've chosen unmanaged switches because I don't THINK that I need the additional features of a managed or "smart" switch.

Unmanaged is fine for most home networks, unless you need traffic shaping for some specific applications.

Originally Posted by Juano11

3. How should I/can I connect my router to the switch? If I have a single Cat5e/Cat6 cable connecting my router won't that act as a potential bottleneck, since I'd be running all of my internet traffic through a single gigabit port on the router. Is it possible to connect more than one port of the router to the switch and maintain the network's "plug and play" nature? I guess that total bandwith shouldn't be a problem, since my internet connection is only 10-30mbps. However, if more than one connection between router and switch is possible, is there any benefit?

You should connect your router to your switch with a single cable. The router's single gigabit connection to the rest of your LAN is still 30-100x faster than your WAN (internet) connection. Your 10-30Mb/s WAN is also "best-case", and assumes that everything else in the cloud (including the server on the other end) can hit those speeds. Do not connect the router & switch with more than 1 cable. I don't think any consumer routers have built-in switches with aggregation/trunking support, and if they did, you'd need a smart switch as well. The cost/benefit of this equipment just isn't there for home networking.

Originally Posted by Juano11

4. how would you suggest that I connect my wireless APs and/or additional 8 port switches? Should I connect as many of them as possible directly to the empty ports on the router, or should I just connect them to the switch as well? Are there benefits to either method? Am I likely to have problems with different network devices "seeing" each other if I connect them one way or the other?

You're describing different shapes of what's called tree or extended star physical topology: a hierarchy of switches that join at your central switch.

Don't use your router's switch as the center of your gigabit lan - it's likely underpowered for the number of connections you're dealing with. Instead, use the 24pt switch. You can connect your WLAN APs to the router, though, since wireless traffic is relatively slow.

Your devices will all see each other as long as they're in the same broadcast domain (they are), ie. on the same subnet (they are), and are properly addressed. Essentially, as long as everything is connected through switches, and you don't have any IP addressing conflicts, you don't have anything to worry about. Assuming your router is handling DHCP, you won't have addressing conflicts. Assuming your router can't create extra subnets (or you don't create any), everything will be in the same BC domain. Unmanaged switches are truly plug-and-play.

Again, if it's not too late, have your cabling contractor run a few some extra drops to those rooms you expect to need additional ports (office? media room?).

[Jay_S]

Between those 2 switches...

Netgear JGS524:

• Lifetime warranty
• 40W max power consumption

D-Link DGS-1024D

• 5-year warranty
• 27W max power consumption (D-Link notes that "Green Ethernet features available on hardware version C1 or later.")

[Juano11]

Jay,

Many thanks for the welcome and reply. Your answers were what I was expecting/hoping to receive.

The only issue will be reduced performance if/when multiple devices connected to the downstream switch need a lot of network bandwidth to some device(s) connected to the main switch - because they're sharing that single up-link.

BUT, if it's not too late can you cable multiple runs to each location? You're buying a 24pt switch, so why stop at 14? Run two to each room, or several to those rooms where you were considering using the down-stream switches. It's cleaner, keeps all your network infrastructure in 1 spot, and you don't have devices competing for the up-link bandwidth. Cable and keystones are cheap now, expensive to add later.

I'm not sure that I'm even going to need those additional switches (they are left overs from my network at my old house). I am having multiple runs to the places that I think that I'm going to need them. I was just checking to make sure that they would work as expected if I did later need to break them out of storage. I understand about the potential bottleneck.

As an aside, this is being done in a ~50 year old, completely finished house. So, none of this is cheap. HA! However, I am having them run conduit through the "hard to access" areas so that I could more easily add additional runs in the future.

Your other three answers to my questions...

Again, many thanks. Your answers confirmed what I thought that I knew/understood about what I was wanting to do. I am, actually, trying to make this network as simple as possible. My wife has a home office, and, although I am her "IT Guy", my knowledge of the subject is pretty limited. Calls during my work day of "how to I make the internet work?" are NOT what I'm looking for...

Once again, thanks for your time.

Juan

[Pugs_KDC]

bare minimum for bedroom cabling is 2 sockets per room maximum of 4, for a Home office minimum is 6 and a maximum of 16, 2 walls with 4 and one wall with 8 sockets on them, behind any Main tv/ HT set up I would go at minimum 4 at most 8. but hey that is just me.

as for switches... D-link

[Juano11]

Pugs, thanks for the switch recommendation. I've had good experience with D-Link products in the past, that's the one that I was leaning toward...

As for your cabling recommendation...WOW! I agree that more is pretty much always better, but I'm pretty sure that your numbers are going to far exceed my needs. If this was new construction, then I would lean toward approaching your numbers, but I think that it may be harder to accomplish since this is an existing home.

They have not run the cables to my entertainment center yet, I'll probably get them to run a few more there. As I mentioned above, I am having much of the cable run through conduit so that I may be able to add a few more in the future.

Thanks again

Juan

[Jay_S]

Hi Juan,

I agree with Pugs. Even though you're running cable in a finished home, running multiple cables is no more effort than running 1, since they all get pulled at the same time. I ran 2 to every room in my 1920's home, and I wish I'd run more twice that in our office and behind the home theater equipment. I have like 700ft of leftover cable, so someday I may re-do it. But I doubt it! Do it right the 1st time if you still can.