.png)
Zero Identity Forums - General - Networking - What network topology to use?
Are you bored? Check out the unaswered threads!
|
tancurrom
 Administrator Nibble  Advanced Analyst Joined: 03.04.2008 Last Seen: 10 year(s) ago Experience: 501.5 Points: 450 |
|
| #1 What network topology to use? on March 25 2009 15:08 | |
|
I have a wireless router/modem connected to the main phoneline, which is providing my connection and everything needing external connection goes through it.
Old topology. Three laptops wirelessly connected. One switch connected directly, with a Xbox 360 and server connected to the switch. Current topology. Three laptops wirelessly connected. Xbox 360 connected wirelessly. Server off. My networks is fairly terrible and as a side note to the main point of the thread I'd ask for peoples opinions in terms of trying to make the network better. Noting that the three laptops will always have to be connected and wirelessly (as in they can't be turned off any more than they already are and can't be wired up). Future topology???... Two laptops wirelessly connected. One laptop? Xbox 360? Server? I tried using the server as a Home Server, but I came to the conclusion that the network needed to be wired for the benefits to be good. So, I switched it back to a web server and it lagged up the network even more. It's purpose could only really be served as a local development server or sandbox. I need to have it wired between a laptop so file access is quickest. It's likely that it will be moved into my room. So the xbox, a laptop and the server will all be in my room. What I'm looking for in my topology is a sub network in my room. Preferably with a single access point that will be connected wirelessly to the router. I want this because I want the xbox, server, laptop to talk to each other as if on there own network and have it wired so it's quick but be using the main router as an access point to the internet. And they're all with in a metre of each other (in my room) so it seems silly to have a load of latency because I can only connect to a wireless access point. I have a spare switch with 16 ports (more than enough) and ethernet cables enough to connected everything. I'd hope to use this in some way and not need new hardware. So, you have all the information. What's my best option? Stuff I thought might be possible solutions: - A network bridge - Two separate routers (one for house, one for me xD) Failing a feasible solution I'll probably keep everything wireless and crossover cable the server and laptop (if it turns out to work well). A Nibble = 1/2 a Byte 
|
|
|
tancurrom
Administrator Nibble Advanced Analyst Joined: 03.04.2008 Last Seen: 10 year(s) ago Experience: 501.5 Points: 450 |
|
| #2 on March 26 2009 19:37 | |
|
I was continuing to think of possible ways to achieve this.
Is it possible to setup a normal network with a router/modem and not have no connection to the internet, but use it to connect all the nodes. But also connect some nodes to the other wireless network for internet access on another router/modem, at the same time or would have have to keep switching between both? A Nibble = 1/2 a Byte
|
|
|
3l_f3n1x
 Member V Fan  Professional Analyst Joined: 05.08.2008 Last Seen: 10 year(s) ago Experience: 271.15 Points: 905 |
|
| #3 on March 26 2009 20:29 | |
|
If both of your routers support several networks you could make a network without internet access another with internet access and between the two routers a different network just for them. Then you need to configure the access list of the routers to prevent the first network to access the Internet, but having the possibility to access the other network... Also if your switch support VLANs then you can have a router connected to the switch and two VLANs and then you need to configure the access list of your router to prevent the first network access the internet but letting it access the second network...
Those are thoughts of course and I don't know if those thoughts answer your question... So I hope this helps... "Beneath this mask there is more than flesh. Beneath this mask there is an idea, Mr. Creedy, and ideas are bulletproof." - V BTW: My username was elfenix |
|
|
Grindordie
 Administrator Software Engineer  ZI Guru Joined: 04.11.2007 Last Seen: 10 year(s) ago Experience: 1074.3 Points: 1100 |
|
| #4 on March 27 2009 01:05 | |
|
You say it lags the network - which network are you talking about?
Your LAN or LAN->WAN. Because you said that you'd just end up using the server as a sandbox meaning that when your server was set up, the lag was due to the lack of bandwidth provided by your ISP. *You could upgrade to a faster package if your pocket allows* If you're talking about a LAN lag then even though you don't have that many nodes on your network there could be a lot of collisions or broadcast storms due to faulty NICs. Like f3n1x said, if your router supports VLANs you can use that to reduce the amount of broadcasts and logically separate your networks. If your router doesn't support VLANs and you have a spare switch, you can just connect the switch to an open port on your router and you can have a sub-network within your network. (daisy-chaining switches) While still being able to access the internet on all the machines within the sub-network unless you restrict them. Your WLAN uses CSMA/CA which basically "avoids" collisions so a lag could be due to electromagnetic interference from nearby devices which causes you to lose packets (and lags because the packets need to be resent). I highly doubt your LAN lags since most, if not all of us, are using 100mbps switches with cabling Cat 5 or better; Plus your WLAN will probably run at 54mbps (in G mode - possibly half-duplex?). |
|
Who is watching forums
| Users viewing this page: | Guests (1) |
| Users viewing the forum: | 0 |