ADSL2+ modem with at least 16 ports?????

Banned 58 replies
Found 23rd Aug 2009
.

I'm currently mid stream of some building work, which amongst other things, gives me a larger office / PC room.

Since I'm also getting this area electrically rewired, I've decided to properly sort out hard wired access around the house.

I currently use a 4 port WiFi ADSL+2 modem with 4 ports and a 8 port switch. This serves the current room, + one hard wired connection in the 3 beds and living room. I intend on increasing this to 2 ports in the bedrooms, 2 in the living room, 2 in the new TV room and plenty of expansion in the PC room.

I know I could just use a switch, but that would create a bottleneck, which could potentially slow the network down - hence why I think a 16 port ADSL2+ modem would be better.

Anyone know of such a beastie? (I know they are available - but info is thin on the ground!), or would I be better off making use of the 4 port, with extra switch boxes, to "share" the load?

Any pointers appreciated.


.

  1. Misc
  2. Router
Groups
  1. Misc
  2. Router
58 Comments

I use an ADSL modem with connected into a 12 port switch with no problems mate, even video streaming and hosting LANs ive never had any bottle necking.

EDIT:

also turn your WiFi off if you can get everything hard wired you will see an increase in performance

Original Poster Banned

leecher;6092518

I use an ADSL modem with connected into a 12 port switch with no problems … I use an ADSL modem with connected into a 12 port switch with no problems mate, even video streaming and hosting LANs ive never had any bottle necking.



Yeh, I have this atm. I just dont want to take any chances - especially with the work going on and easy access to do these changes. If each bedroom and living room were streaming at the same time (which is a possibility), I'm pretty sure there would be a hit!

also turn your WiFi off if you can get everything hard wired you will see … also turn your WiFi off if you can get everything hard wired you will see an increase in performance



Wifi is needed for the iphones and laptops! Crazy I know!

I use an 8 port switch from my Virgin modem. Out of one of the ports on the switch i connect a single wireless access point and notice no loss in performance whatsoever. Yeah so its more kit but it works better than one thing doing the whole lot imo. Into the access point ive got 2 laptops and a PS3 running.

Most business class networks, Cisco and such, will use switches to their full potential. I cant see a great loss bottleneck wise. TBH m8 i think it would be the way to go. Ive never had a prob tbh with my network and thats what switches are designed for.

Original Poster Banned

Squelds;6092565

I use a 16 port switch from my Virgin modem. Out of one of the ports on … I use a 16 port switch from my Virgin modem. Out of one of the ports on the switch i connect a single wirless access point and notice no loss in performance whatsoever. Yeah so its more kit but it works better than one thing doing the whole lot imo.



When you say youve noticed no loss - is that just an assumption - or have you made tests with all ports being used simultaniously?

Genuine question (No sarcasm intended!)

There is a possibility of a heavy load if all users are streaming at the same time. Obviously, there would be a single cable bottleneck in this solution. Having said that, I did say it wouldnt be a problem to use the modem with 4 switches attached. I just dont want to get it wrong!

Are we just talking about streaming or internet access aswell ?

Original Poster Banned

Squelds;6092636

Are we just talking about streaming or internet access aswell ?



Both.

]Would this be of any use?

There is gonna be a lot of factors to consider m8. If its internet acess youve gotta think about what service you are getting 8, 10, 16, 20 or even 50 meg. Then theres cabling Cat5 100meg or Cat6 1000meg. Then there the switches you are gonna use... if youve only got Cat5 then theres no point in getting a gig switch as it wouldnt use it to its full potentially anyway. In terms of streaming to various rooms in the house it depends on your server. My server is one PC with 2 terrab hdds in it. Now if 4 people were all hitting the server at the same time requesting movies then its as fast as the hdd's can keep up with it, remember theyve only got one head in them so thats a lot of moving to and fro to pump out the data required.. In my house i notice no loss if 2 people are streaming at the same time and i can surf the internet no probs. If however im torrenting, which maxes out my 20mb internet, and 3 peeps are streaming then it does slow it down a bit - im using only cat5 with a 100mb switch though.

guv;6092660

Both.]Would this be of any use?



If I were doing this, I would buy something second hand, enterprise class, from fleabay. Residential / consumer level stuff is not really in the same league. Just my personal opinion.
.

Original Poster Banned

Squelds;6092765

There is gonna be a lot of factors to consider m8. If its internet acess … There is gonna be a lot of factors to consider m8. If its internet acess youve gotta think about what service you are getting 8, 10, 16, 20 or even 50 meg. Then theres cabling Cat5 100meg or Cat6 1000meg. Then there the switches you are gonna use... if youve only got Cat5 then theres no point in getting a gig switch as it wouldnt use it to its full potentially anyway. In terms of streaming to various rooms in the house it depends on your server. My server is one PC with 2 terrab hdds in it. Now if 4 people were all hitting the server at the same time requesting movies then its as fast as the hdd's can keep up with it, remember theyve only got one head in them so thats a lot of moving to and fro to pump out the data required.. In my house i notice no loss if 2 people are streaming at the same time and i can surf the internet no probs. If however im torrenting, which maxes out my 20mb internet, and 3 peeps are streaming then it does slow it down a bit - im using only cat5 with a 100mb switch though.



Yeh, it will just be Cat 5. (I bought 1000m 6 months ago when I did the initial hardwire to upstairs.)

To be honest, I wasn't going to build a server for it - but I guess it would be the best way to go.

]Is this switch any good? I ask because I have a brand new one sitting next to me that was a surplus purchase made at work!:whistling:

Heavertron;6092769

If I were doing this, I would buy something second hand, enterprise … If I were doing this, I would buy something second hand, enterprise class, from fleabay. Residential / consumer level stuff is not really in the same league. Just my personal opinion..



Annoyingly, I sold one on fleabay myself about 2 years ago! (Cisco gear that cost £1800 - for approx £40)

Original Poster Banned

BTW - can anyone define the differences between Routers, Switches and Hubs?

They all seem to do the same thing. AFAICT, a hub is dumb, where a switch and router intelligent. However, it gets further confusing when you see mention of managed and unmanaged switches.

guv;6092860

BTW - can anyone define the differences between Routers, Switches and … BTW - can anyone define the differences between Routers, Switches and Hubs?They all seem to do the same thing. AFAICT, a hub is dumb, where a switch and router intelligent. However, it gets further confusing when you see mention of managed and unmanaged switches.



You are correct about switches and hubs, hubs just echo the traffic down all the ports where the right one will pick it up whereas switches intelligently send the traffic where it is meant to go. Unmanaged switches are relatively basic in that they allow data across their ports but you don't have much in the way of configuration options whereas managed switches allow you set up vlans, individual port options, spanning tree setups etc. - these are obviously intended for enterprise use.

As for your question, I'd stick a gigabit switch onto the existing router - I assume the problem you are referring to is the wireless traffic coming across from the router to the services on the switch but in practice I don't think this is a problem. With heavy traffic you'll probably find the wireless performance is going to be poor and not enough to saturate the 100Mb/s link to the switch. By going gigabit if you have any devices with gigabit cards on the gigabit switch you should notice improved performance.

John

Johnmcl7;6093005

With heavy traffic you'll probably find the wireless performance is … With heavy traffic you'll probably find the wireless performance is going to be poor and not enough to saturate the 100Mb/s link to the switch. By going gigabit if you have any devices with gigabit cards on the gigabit switch you should notice improved performance.John



There is no point buying a gigabit if hes only using cat5. It will not utilise it to its full potential.

Squelds;6093061

There is no point buying a gigbit if hes only using cat5. It will not … There is no point buying a gigbit if hes only using cat5. It will not ustilise it to its full potential.



You can run gigabit over cat5e for 1000Base-T.

John

m8 cat5 is realistically used in 100mbps scenarios and didnt he say he only got cat5 not cat5e ?

Yep to some degree it will perform better over gigabit but not enough to warrant the extra cash on a gigabit hw.

Squelds;6093077

m8 cat5 is 100mbps and didnt he say he only got cat5 not cat5e ?Yep to … m8 cat5 is 100mbps and didnt he say he only got cat5 not cat5e ?Yep to some degree it will perform better over gigabit but not enough to warrant the extra cash on a gigabit hw.



Most (if not all) Cat5 cable is Cat5e or at least capable of gigabit speeds - 1000Base-T needs four pair, I've had no problems running gigabit speeds over standard network cable.

John

yep i agree with that.. but he needs to know what cable he got before making the descision to go gigabit or standard 100base-T.

I havent looked into the difference in price when choosing gigabit over standard 100base-T h/w so cant comment atm... maybe youre right with the choice. But if hes only got cat5 (yeah i know most is enhanced nowadays anyway) BUT if he has then i cant see that much of a benefit IF price is double/treble ??

Yep if it were me now, and i wired my house up about 8 years ago with only cat5 coz that was pretty much the standard then, id go gigabit. For the extra pounds it would def be worth it... but as i say i havent looked into prices so cant really comment on how much it would exactly be.

Then again if it were me now id wire up my house with cat6e to get the full 10gig future proof solution :-D

Why argue about the cable, on the run lengths that Guv is planning it won't make any odds. It's not like he's wiring up an office block :lol:

Nones arguing m8... just a friendly Sunday discussion about the theories of networking. If we can come to the best solution for him through discussion the surely its in his best interest ;-)

Original Poster Banned

Cheers guys.

I can confirm the cable is Cat5e. Most of the lengths are just a few metres, however the ones to the bedrooms are routed via the loft. the may be 30m in length, maybe slightly more.

Also, just to clarify, there isnt any bottleneck I'm aware of ATM with the existing. However, once I add the ability to stream to those bedrooms and the living room, there could be a hit. If I hadn't already bought the cable, I'd go for the Cat6 solution. However, I've already got it!

So basically it sounds like I wouldnt need a 16 port adsl2+ modem? (My line connection speed is 16.5Mb)

So it sounds like I could run a single cable from the modem to a switch upstairs and feed from that to the bedrooms. Have one in the PC room and one in the living room.

I'm not entirely sure If Ive explained myself that well tbh.

Maybe im off track here but why not get a single adsl modem which is then run into a 16port router/switch ?

MY setup is a single Virgin modem which is going into a Netgear 8 port router with switching. Is there such a thing as a 16 port adsl modem ?

Cat6 is better shielded but for your use Cat5e will be fine for gigabit - you don't need the Cat6 so don't worry about that.

Are you going to connect the downstairs devices directly into the modem router?

John

Original Poster Banned

Squelds;6093243

Maybe im off track here but why not get a single adsl modem which is then … Maybe im off track here but why not get a single adsl modem which is then run into a 16port router/switch ?MY setup is a single Virgin modem which is going into a Netgear 8 port router with switching.



The original question was to buy a 16 post ADSL2+ modem....... so I dont have anything sharing!!

The link from the modem to the switch is a potential bottleneck.

Guys im just looking at 16 port routers/switches atm... are there any out there sub £150 ??

EDIT i cant see any bottleneck from a 16.5mb modem connection to router/switch. Any in theory it will do exactly the same thing surely ?? If anything id say that there would be more load on the modem if it were doing everything around the house. At least by going router/switch way then any LAN traffic would be segregated from any WAN traffic within the same unit... if that makes sense.

I dunno.. John help me out here LOL. Ive just been looking and cant see anything sold as a 16 port asdl modem/router/switch ?

Original Poster Banned

Johnmcl7;6093253

Cat6 is better shielded but for your use Cat5e will be fine for gigabit - … Cat6 is better shielded but for your use Cat5e will be fine for gigabit - you don't need the Cat6 so don't worry about that.Are you going to connect the downstairs devices directly into the modem router?



The modem only has 4 ports - hence the question. Ideally Id prefer to do it this way, so nothing on any cable could be affected by the others. So running a single cable from the modem to a single switch upstairs (with 6 connections from it), downstairs, another port is taken and feeds the PC room, which I'm less bothered about. And another in the living room using another switch. (leaving one port spare I guess!)

Am I wrong in thinking this would be a faster solution, than using one of the ports to a single 16 port switch, with everything running from that?

Original Poster Banned

Squelds;6093270

Guys im just looking at 16 port routers/switches atm... are there any out … Guys im just looking at 16 port routers/switches atm... are there any out there sub £150 ??EDIT i cant see any bottleneck from a 16.5mb modem connection to router/switch. Any in theory it will do exactly the same thing surely ?? If anything id say that there would be more load on the modem if it were doing everything around the house. At least by going router/switch way then any LAN traffic would be segregated from any WAN traffic within the same unit... if that makes sense.



Yes, I expect from an internet perspective, its fine. But with 5 HD TVs potentially on the Go at any one time............

Just caught the edit.... yes I can see what youre saying on the last bit.

I admit I'm completely uncertain.... hence the questions!

BTW.... I mentioned the unopened boxed Netgear FVS318 I have sitting here. That any good? (I'm guessing this is the "managed switch" type John?)

guv;6093297

Yes, I expect from an internet perspective, its fine. But with 5 HD TVs … Yes, I expect from an internet perspective, its fine. But with 5 HD TVs potentially on the Go at any one time............



But what are you doing with these TVs. Are they gonna be streaming from a single media server like my setup as previously mentioned ?

EDIT... you also realise that with all this talk about gigabit etc the Netgear FVS318 is only 100base-t anyway.

guv;6093297

Yes, I expect from an internet perspective, its fine. But with 5 HD TVs … Yes, I expect from an internet perspective, its fine. But with 5 HD TVs potentially on the Go at any one time............



What will the HDTV's be streaming from, one source or different ones?

John

Original Poster Banned

Squelds;6093309

But what are you doing with these TVs. Are they gonna be streaming from a … But what are you doing with these TVs. Are they gonna be streaming from a single media server like my setup as previously mentioned ?



Possibly - or from different sources on the network! (Sad I know - but I could also have upto 12 PCs running at any one time too!)

Would the single server machine route be the better idea?

guv;6093297

Yes, I expect from an internet perspective, its fine. But with 5 HD TVs … Yes, I expect from an internet perspective, its fine. But with 5 HD TVs potentially on the Go at any one time............Just caught the edit.... yes I can see what youre saying on the last bit.I admit I'm completely uncertain.... hence the questions!BTW.... I mentioned the unopened boxed Netgear FVS318 I have sitting here. That any good? (I'm guessing this is the "managed switch" type John?)



No, it's a budget VPN router from what I recall although you could use it as a basic switch.

John

Original Poster Banned

Johnmcl7;6093316

What will the HDTV's be streaming from, one source or different ones?



Just to put things into perspective here - the scenario of 5 HD TVs on the go streaming simultaneously is unlikely.

I've got one of those Linksys "slug" devices that can be used. I never use it - its too slow even to burn a DVD at 2x speed! Its this type of thing, that is making me want to be 100% sure!

Original Poster Banned

Johnmcl7;6093322

No, it's a budget VPN router from what I recall although you could use it … No, it's a budget VPN router from what I recall although you could use it as a basic switch.



Cool. Ive got no intention of running stuff online (satellite stuff apart), though it would be good to setup home security cameras with it!

It would be helpful if you could draw a simple diagram of the two setups you're considering as I'm still having troble understanding where the potential bottleneck is. I can't really see any scenario where you're going to have performance problems running a 16 port switch out of a single port on the modem router vs all 16 ports being on board as long as you didn't cable anything else through the modem router.

I run a relatively simple 100Mb/s network with two servers bridged over powerline and the main problem is the wireless devices as the latency goes very high when there's a few wireless devices which are making heavy use of the router. The powerline network extension was fitted to resolve this and seems to work fine performance wise. I've not had much luck fitting a second wireless access point to break up the wireless access but there's a lot of wireless access points running nearby which is limiting the frequency choice.

John

Johnmcl7;6093371

I can't really see any scenario where you're going to have performance … I can't really see any scenario where you're going to have performance problems running a 16 port switch out of a single port on the modem router vs all 16 ports being on board as long as you didn't cable anything else through the modem router.John



John is giving great advice here re fitting a gigabit switch. Nothing more to add. Try and get a decent standard second hand one on fleabay if you want to avoid rebooting it every other day, or returning several retail standard ones before you get a decent one.

I can only assume John is drawing on his professional knowledge here, so in addition to my professional knowledge, what more can we say? ;-)

What do you mean John when you say 'as long as you dont cable anything else through the modem router' ?

Like what for example.. wireless access points ?

Would this affect my setup if so ?

Squelds;6093456

What do you mean John when you say 'as long as you dont cable anything … What do you mean John when you say 'as long as you dont cable anything else through the modem router' ?



Because it will be more efficient if it's communicating between devices on the switch to directly be connected to the switch itself - if it's connected to the router then there's going to be some performance loss going across to devices on the attached switch, especially if the switch is gigabit and the device has gigabit capability. If it's something that's basically solely going out through the internet and not connnecting to other devices then it would be fine to go in through the modem router's port.

John

So let me try and get my head round it... so what i said before about LAN traffic vs WAN traffic is pretty much what your saying there ?? IE.. the media streaming on his intranet vs what he needs to the various pcs on the internet side of things ? Try and segregate each down in terms of usage via switching ?

Squelds;6093484

So let me try and get my head round it... so what i said before about LAN … So let me try and get my head round it... so what i said before about LAN traffic vs WAN traffic is pretty much what your saying there ?? IE.. the media streaming on his intranet vs what he needs to the various pcs on the internet side of things ? Try and segregate each down in terms of usage via switching ?



A dedicated switch is better at "switching" than an all in one Router/modem/switch. Use the ADSL router as purely a modem / Wifi access point.

OK perhaps thats what i was trying to get at all along but didnt quite come out right lol. Or did it.. thats what i said earlier ! Ah well i think i understand what everyones getting at. And sorry OP for all this confusion. But what you are asking to me is quite a bit jobby with so much going on. My network is very simplistic... 5 pcs, 2 wireless lappys and a wireless PS3, a wired PS3 and a wired xbox media server.

My setup is a single Virgin modem that runs into an 8 port router with switching. Perhaps i could segregate it down even more for better efficiency but it does the jobs i need atm and doesnt involve buying any extra h/w.

Perhaps when i win the lottery next week and buy my mansion i will call on you John to come round and wire me up m8 ;-)

Squelds;6093539

My setup is a single Virgin modem that run into an 8 port router with … My setup is a single Virgin modem that run into an 8 port router with switching. Perhaps i could segregate it down even more for better efficiency but it does the jobs i need atm and doesnt involve buying any extra h/w.



That sounds fine to me because everything is on the same switch, if you wanted to expand the number of wired devices you'd be better putting everything through one larger switch (where possible) rather than patching through two switches where possible.

John

something seems to have been overlooked which may or may not be anything as your dsl connection is only 20mb there will be no bottle neck via the router
if you are talking about heavy streaming of hd content one slight risk here is that any heavy usage of the wifi combined with say torrenting on the wired link may cause dhcp problems on other wired links.
Obviously it is minimal but as a precaution it may be worth considering a separate wifi access point no? that is if you intend to use dhcp
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text
    Top Discussions
    1. Just heard this...2 ★★★★★★★★★★★★★★ congrats to all on 392k ★★★★★★★★★★★★★★7769219
    2. miikeyblue and shabbird's (but mostly shabbird's) Tuesday night pub quiz!564081
    3. Leicester sack their manager!815
    4. The HUKD Wuntu code sharing thread! (Three Mobile)91185

    See more discussions