Science Forums
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Jeff Strickland
Guest
|
 Posted: Wed Jun 18, 2008 2:56 am Post subject: Network Question |
 |
|
Two computers, maybe more if this works.
A business out in the wine country where there is no high speed service in
the area. There is a need (a requirement) for high speed internet, so the
owner bought a Verizon card for a connection. The card has a montly fee of
60-ish dollars.
He has a wireless router.
Can I connect the machine with the card in it to the wireless router via an
ethernet cable and install a wireless adaptor in another machine, then get
on the 'net from the second machine through the router and back to the first
machine with the Verizon card in it?
It seems to me that the plan ought to work, but I don't know how much
traffic the card can support, or if it can be networked at all. Frankly, I
know nothing about these cards except that they tend to be expensive so one
needs a very strong reason to get one. I think this business owner would
enjoy getting more work done, but right now a person has to leave a work
station to go to another one to perform tasks that the boss would like to be
done from wherever the person is sitting.
The machines have 10/100 cards in them, which begs the question, why not
connect everything with wires? That's a good question, and is a cheaper
solutioin than buying a wireless adaptor. The same hurdle vis a vis the
traffic that the Verizon card can handle remains.
Basically, I have Machine A that has an internet connection, Machine B which
does not, and a wireless router. I intend to connect Machine A to the
goes-into port on the router, and either connect Machine B to one of four
goes-outta ports on the router, or add a wireless adaptor to Machine B and
connect to the router that way. This will physically establish the network
via hardware, where my plan falls apart is on the software side.
This configuration is different than what is in my house, but I have a far
different environment. I get Verizon FiOS (fiber optic service) that has a
down-converter where the optic cable comes up. There is a CAT5 cable in the
converter that feeds the goes-into port on my router, then I have another
CAT5 cable in a goes-outta port that feeds my computer in the garage. I have
several other computers that wirelessly connect to the router, and in turn
to the fiber system.
Where I go sideways on networks is that I envision a server somewhere in the
system, but I have no server per se in my own system -- which means I don't
understand all that I know. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Weyoun the Dancing Borg
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 18, 2008 9:17 am Post subject: Re: Network Question |
|
|
On Jun 17, 10:56 pm, "Jeff Strickland" <cr...@verizon.net> wrote:
| Quote: |
Two computers, maybe more if this works.
A business out in the wine country where there is no high speed service in
the area. There is a need (a requirement) for high speed internet, so the
owner bought a Verizon card for a connection. The card has a montly fee of
60-ish dollars.
He has a wireless router.
Can I connect the machine with the card in it to the wireless router via an
ethernet cable and install a wireless adaptor in another machine, then get
on the 'net from the second machine through the router and back to the first
machine with the Verizon card in it?
It seems to me that the plan ought to work, but I don't know how much
traffic the card can support, or if it can be networked at all. Frankly, I
know nothing about these cards except that they tend to be expensive so one
needs a very strong reason to get one. I think this business owner would
enjoy getting more work done, but right now a person has to leave a work
station to go to another one to perform tasks that the boss would like to be
done from wherever the person is sitting.
The machines have 10/100 cards in them, which begs the question, why not
connect everything with wires? That's a good question, and is a cheaper
solutioin than buying a wireless adaptor. The same hurdle vis a vis the
traffic that the Verizon card can handle remains.
Basically, I have Machine A that has an internet connection, Machine B which
does not, and a wireless router. I intend to connect Machine A to the
goes-into port on the router, and either connect Machine B to one of four
goes-outta ports on the router, or add a wireless adaptor to Machine B and
connect to the router that way. This will physically establish the network
via hardware, where my plan falls apart is on the software side.
This configuration is different than what is in my house, but I have a far
different environment. I get Verizon FiOS (fiber optic service) that has a
down-converter where the optic cable comes up. There is a CAT5 cable in the
converter that feeds the goes-into port on my router, then I have another
CAT5 cable in a goes-outta port that feeds my computer in the garage. I have
several other computers that wirelessly connect to the router, and in turn
to the fiber system.
Where I go sideways on networks is that I envision a server somewhere in the
system, but I have no server per se in my own system -- which means I don't
understand all that I know.
|
If it's a small network, can it not be set up with the Windows Home
Networking? I think that has an option for a computer having internet
access and other computers connecting to that computer to receive
their access? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Baron
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 18, 2008 11:01 am Post subject: Re: Network Question |
|
|
Weyoun the Dancing Borg Inscribed thus:
| Quote: |
On Jun 17, 10:56Â pm, "Jeff Strickland" <cr...@verizon.net> wrote:
Two computers, maybe more if this works.
A business out in the wine country where there is no high speed
service in the area. There is a need (a requirement) for high speed
internet, so the owner bought a Verizon card for a connection. The
card has a montly fee of 60-ish dollars.
He has a wireless router.
Can I connect the machine with the card in it to the wireless router
via an ethernet cable and install a wireless adaptor in another
machine, then get on the 'net from the second machine through the
router and back to the first machine with the Verizon card in it?
It seems to me that the plan ought to work, but I don't know how much
traffic the card can support, or if it can be networked at all.
Frankly, I know nothing about these cards except that they tend to be
expensive so one needs a very strong reason to get one. I think this
business owner would enjoy getting more work done, but right now a
person has to leave a work station to go to another one to perform
tasks that the boss would like to be done from wherever the person is
sitting.
The machines have 10/100 cards in them, which begs the question, why
not connect everything with wires? That's a good question, and is a
cheaper solutioin than buying a wireless adaptor. The same hurdle vis
a vis the traffic that the Verizon card can handle remains.
Basically, I have Machine A that has an internet connection, Machine
B which does not, and a wireless router. I intend to connect Machine
A to the goes-into port on the router, and either connect Machine B
to one of four goes-outta ports on the router, or add a wireless
adaptor to Machine B and connect to the router that way. This will
physically establish the network via hardware, where my plan falls
apart is on the software side.
This configuration is different than what is in my house, but I have
a far different environment. I get Verizon FiOS (fiber optic service)
that has a down-converter where the optic cable comes up. There is a
CAT5 cable in the converter that feeds the goes-into port on my
router, then I have another CAT5 cable in a goes-outta port that
feeds my computer in the garage. I have several other computers that
wirelessly connect to the router, and in turn to the fiber system.
Where I go sideways on networks is that I envision a server somewhere
in the system, but I have no server per se in my own system -- which
means I don't understand all that I know.
If it's a small network, can it not be set up with the Windows Home
Networking? I think that has an option for a computer having internet
access and other computers connecting to that computer to receive
their access?
|
It does ! The only downside is that the machine suppling the feed has
to be switched on.
--
Best Reagrds:
Baron. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Baron
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 18, 2008 11:01 am Post subject: Re: Network Question |
|
|
Jeff Strickland Inscribed thus:
| Quote: |
Two computers, maybe more if this works.
A business out in the wine country where there is no high speed
service in the area. There is a need (a requirement) for high speed
internet, so the owner bought a Verizon card for a connection. The
card has a montly fee of 60-ish dollars.
He has a wireless router.
Can I connect the machine with the card in it to the wireless router
via an ethernet cable and install a wireless adaptor in another
machine, then get on the 'net from the second machine through the
router and back to the first machine with the Verizon card in it?
It seems to me that the plan ought to work, but I don't know how much
traffic the card can support, or if it can be networked at all.
Frankly, I know nothing about these cards except that they tend to be
expensive so one needs a very strong reason to get one. I think this
business owner would enjoy getting more work done, but right now a
person has to leave a work station to go to another one to perform
tasks that the boss would like to be done from wherever the person is
sitting.
The machines have 10/100 cards in them, which begs the question, why
not connect everything with wires? That's a good question, and is a
cheaper solutioin than buying a wireless adaptor. The same hurdle vis
a vis the traffic that the Verizon card can handle remains.
|
Jeff, This is the thing I would look at first ! A wired connection
will always work with the minimum of fuss.
If you go down the wireless route you will probably have to use an
access point to distribute the signal and you will have to have a
wireless card in each machine that you want to connect.
As far as the traffic handling of the Verizon card is concerned I
wouldn't worry about it at all.... Unless you have a 100Mb Internet
feed !!!
| Quote: |
Basically, I have Machine A that has an internet connection, Machine B
which does not, and a wireless router. I intend to connect Machine A
to the goes-into port on the router, and either connect Machine B to
one of four goes-outta ports on the router, or add a wireless adaptor
to Machine B and connect to the router that way. This will physically
establish the network via hardware, where my plan falls apart is on
the software side.
|
Physical connections are virtually automatic ! The router hands out an
address and the machine talks to the router.
| Quote: |
This configuration is different than what is in my house, but I have a
far different environment. I get Verizon FiOS (fiber optic service)
that has a down-converter where the optic cable comes up. There is a
CAT5 cable in the converter that feeds the goes-into port on my
router, then I have another CAT5 cable in a goes-outta port that feeds
my computer in the garage. I have several other computers that
wirelessly connect to the router, and in turn to the fiber system.
|
From either point of view the router does the work of establishing
communications with the ISP. The other side of the router hands out
addresses to the machines as they request them via DHCP. This allows
the machine to communicate with the Internet. Any machine that is on
the same network can also communicate with any other machine on that
network.
| Quote: |
Where I go sideways on networks is that I envision a server somewhere
in the system, but I have no server per se in my own system -- which
means I don't understand all that I know.
|
Yes the server is in the router ! Its providing DHCP to the internal
network. In reality Wins provides so many server services that most
people don't know about.
--
Best Reagrds:
Baron. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Jeff Strickland
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 19, 2008 6:01 am Post subject: Re: Network Question |
|
|
"Baron" <baron.nospam@linuxmaniac.nospam.net> wrote in message
news:g3ajo4$aic$1@registered.motzarella.org...
| Quote: |
Jeff Strickland Inscribed thus:
Two computers, maybe more if this works.
A business out in the wine country where there is no high speed
service in the area. There is a need (a requirement) for high speed
internet, so the owner bought a Verizon card for a connection. The
card has a montly fee of 60-ish dollars.
He has a wireless router.
Can I connect the machine with the card in it to the wireless router
via an ethernet cable and install a wireless adaptor in another
machine, then get on the 'net from the second machine through the
router and back to the first machine with the Verizon card in it?
It seems to me that the plan ought to work, but I don't know how much
traffic the card can support, or if it can be networked at all.
Frankly, I know nothing about these cards except that they tend to be
expensive so one needs a very strong reason to get one. I think this
business owner would enjoy getting more work done, but right now a
person has to leave a work station to go to another one to perform
tasks that the boss would like to be done from wherever the person is
sitting.
The machines have 10/100 cards in them, which begs the question, why
not connect everything with wires? That's a good question, and is a
cheaper solutioin than buying a wireless adaptor. The same hurdle vis
a vis the traffic that the Verizon card can handle remains.
Jeff, This is the thing I would look at first ! A wired connection
will always work with the minimum of fuss.
If you go down the wireless route you will probably have to use an
access point to distribute the signal and you will have to have a
wireless card in each machine that you want to connect.
As far as the traffic handling of the Verizon card is concerned I
wouldn't worry about it at all.... Unless you have a 100Mb Internet
feed !!!
Basically, I have Machine A that has an internet connection, Machine B
which does not, and a wireless router. I intend to connect Machine A
to the goes-into port on the router, and either connect Machine B to
one of four goes-outta ports on the router, or add a wireless adaptor
to Machine B and connect to the router that way. This will physically
establish the network via hardware, where my plan falls apart is on
the software side.
Physical connections are virtually automatic ! The router hands out an
address and the machine talks to the router.
This configuration is different than what is in my house, but I have a
far different environment. I get Verizon FiOS (fiber optic service)
that has a down-converter where the optic cable comes up. There is a
CAT5 cable in the converter that feeds the goes-into port on my
router, then I have another CAT5 cable in a goes-outta port that feeds
my computer in the garage. I have several other computers that
wirelessly connect to the router, and in turn to the fiber system.
From either point of view the router does the work of establishing
communications with the ISP. The other side of the router hands out
addresses to the machines as they request them via DHCP. This allows
the machine to communicate with the Internet. Any machine that is on
the same network can also communicate with any other machine on that
network.
Where I go sideways on networks is that I envision a server somewhere
in the system, but I have no server per se in my own system -- which
means I don't understand all that I know.
Yes the server is in the router ! Its providing DHCP to the internal
network. In reality Wins provides so many server services that most
people don't know about.
|
So, what I have to do is make Machine A and Machine B talk to each other,
and then get Machine B to get to the Internet through the card installed in
Machine A.
The router is a wireless router, but it has 5 ports on it as well. Obviously
one of the ports is the feed, and four of them are nodes. I think this makes
a router handle traffic sorta like a hub, or allows hub-like configuration.
The router at my house has a hard-wire coming from the downconverter (the
device that turns my fiber optic connecton into a wire connection). In my
Project, I _think_ I have to connect the computer that has the Verizon card
in it to the same port that the downconverter is connected to at my house,
then connect other computers either by CAT5 or through wireless.
In my Project, there is a computer that is connected to the 'net, and I want
to use that connection at other work stations. I plan on leveraging the
router, but I'm confused that I can make the connections as I want ... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Jeff Strickland
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 19, 2008 6:03 am Post subject: Re: Network Question |
|
|
"Weyoun the Dancing Borg" <weyounthedancingborg@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:49651f88-661a-4aa8-b4b5-2d93326846c7@s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
On Jun 17, 10:56 pm, "Jeff Strickland" <cr...@verizon.net> wrote:
| Quote: |
Two computers, maybe more if this works.
A business out in the wine country where there is no high speed service in
the area. There is a need (a requirement) for high speed internet, so the
owner bought a Verizon card for a connection. The card has a montly fee of
60-ish dollars.
He has a wireless router.
Can I connect the machine with the card in it to the wireless router via
an
ethernet cable and install a wireless adaptor in another machine, then get
on the 'net from the second machine through the router and back to the
first
machine with the Verizon card in it?
It seems to me that the plan ought to work, but I don't know how much
traffic the card can support, or if it can be networked at all. Frankly, I
know nothing about these cards except that they tend to be expensive so
one
needs a very strong reason to get one. I think this business owner would
enjoy getting more work done, but right now a person has to leave a work
station to go to another one to perform tasks that the boss would like to
be
done from wherever the person is sitting.
The machines have 10/100 cards in them, which begs the question, why not
connect everything with wires? That's a good question, and is a cheaper
solutioin than buying a wireless adaptor. The same hurdle vis a vis the
traffic that the Verizon card can handle remains.
Basically, I have Machine A that has an internet connection, Machine B
which
does not, and a wireless router. I intend to connect Machine A to the
goes-into port on the router, and either connect Machine B to one of four
goes-outta ports on the router, or add a wireless adaptor to Machine B and
connect to the router that way. This will physically establish the network
via hardware, where my plan falls apart is on the software side.
This configuration is different than what is in my house, but I have a far
different environment. I get Verizon FiOS (fiber optic service) that has a
down-converter where the optic cable comes up. There is a CAT5 cable in
the
converter that feeds the goes-into port on my router, then I have another
CAT5 cable in a goes-outta port that feeds my computer in the garage. I
have
several other computers that wirelessly connect to the router, and in turn
to the fiber system.
Where I go sideways on networks is that I envision a server somewhere in
the
system, but I have no server per se in my own system -- which means I
don't
understand all that I know.
|
If it's a small network, can it not be set up with the Windows Home
Networking? I think that has an option for a computer having internet
access and other computers connecting to that computer to receive
their access?
<JS>
It is my intent to do that. I'm struggling with architecture.
</JS> |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Baron
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 19, 2008 11:00 am Post subject: Re: Network Question |
|
|
Hi Jeff,
Jeff Strickland Inscribed thus:
| Quote: |
"Baron" <baron.nospam@linuxmaniac.nospam.net> wrote in message
news:g3ajo4$aic$1@registered.motzarella.org...
Jeff Strickland Inscribed thus:
Two computers, maybe more if this works.
A business out in the wine country where there is no high speed
service in the area. There is a need (a requirement) for high speed
internet, so the owner bought a Verizon card for a connection. The
card has a montly fee of 60-ish dollars.
He has a wireless router.
Can I connect the machine with the card in it to the wireless router
via an ethernet cable and install a wireless adaptor in another
machine, then get on the 'net from the second machine through the
router and back to the first machine with the Verizon card in it?
It seems to me that the plan ought to work, but I don't know how
much traffic the card can support, or if it can be networked at all.
Frankly, I know nothing about these cards except that they tend to
be expensive so one needs a very strong reason to get one. I think
this business owner would enjoy getting more work done, but right
now a person has to leave a work station to go to another one to
perform tasks that the boss would like to be done from wherever the
person is sitting.
The machines have 10/100 cards in them, which begs the question, why
not connect everything with wires? That's a good question, and is a
cheaper solutioin than buying a wireless adaptor. The same hurdle
vis a vis the traffic that the Verizon card can handle remains.
Jeff, This is the thing I would look at first ! A wired connection
will always work with the minimum of fuss.
If you go down the wireless route you will probably have to use an
access point to distribute the signal and you will have to have a
wireless card in each machine that you want to connect.
As far as the traffic handling of the Verizon card is concerned I
wouldn't worry about it at all.... Unless you have a 100Mb Internet
feed !!!
Basically, I have Machine A that has an internet connection, Machine
B which does not, and a wireless router. I intend to connect Machine
A to the goes-into port on the router, and either connect Machine B
to one of four goes-outta ports on the router,
|
Yes just plug machine "B" into one of the router "out" ports !
| Quote: |
or add a wireless
adaptor to Machine B and connect to the router that way. This will
physically establish the network via hardware, where my plan falls
apart is on the software side.
Physical connections are virtually automatic ! The router hands out
an address and the machine talks to the router.
This configuration is different than what is in my house, but I have
a far different environment. I get Verizon FiOS (fiber optic
service) that has a down-converter where the optic cable comes up.
There is a CAT5 cable in the converter that feeds the goes-into port
on my router, then I have another CAT5 cable in a goes-outta port
that feeds my computer in the garage. I have several other computers
that wirelessly connect to the router, and in turn to the fiber
system.
|
All your are doing is making a connection to the router. The router
does the hard work !
| Quote: |
From either point of view the router does the work of establishing
communications with the ISP. The other side of the router hands out
addresses to the machines as they request them via DHCP. This allows
the machine to communicate with the Internet. Any machine that is on
the same network can also communicate with any other machine on that
network.
Where I go sideways on networks is that I envision a server
somewhere in the system, but I have no server per se in my own
system -- which means I don't understand all that I know.
Yes the server is in the router ! Its providing DHCP to the internal
network. In reality Wins provides so many server services that most
people don't know about.
So, what I have to do is make Machine A and Machine B talk to each
other, and then get Machine B to get to the Internet through the card
installed in Machine A.
|
If you want to go down the machine to machine route Yes ! Just plug in
a network cable its far easier and more reliable. It will work from
just plugging in the cable.
| Quote: |
The router is a wireless router, but it has 5 ports on it as well.
Obviously one of the ports is the feed, and four of them are nodes. I
think this makes a router handle traffic sorta like a hub, or allows
hub-like configuration.
|
No its a router ! Each port can handle anything from one machine upto
the maximum for that router. My router "Draytec" has four ports. Each
port can handle upto the maximum number of computers that the router
has address space. In my case 1024 machines. Or 256 machines per port.
| Quote: |
The router at my house has a hard-wire coming from the downconverter
(the device that turns my fiber optic connecton into a wire
connection). In my Project, I _think_ I have to connect the computer
that has the Verizon card in it to the same port that the
downconverter is connected to at my house, then connect other
computers either by CAT5 or through wireless.
|
I have not had the pleasure of a "Verizon Card" ! I assume that its
similar to an internal network card ?
| Quote: |
In my Project, there is a computer that is connected to the 'net, and
I want to use that connection at other work stations. I plan on
leveraging the router, but I'm confused that I can make the
connections as I want ...
|
As I said, just plug in a network cable. If you need more connections
from the router then use a multi port switch.
--
Best Reagrds:
Baron. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
jameshanley39@yahoo.co.uk
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 19, 2008 4:27 pm Post subject: Re: Network Question |
|
|
On 19 Jun, 11:22, Baron <baron.nos...@linuxmaniac.nospam.net> wrote:
<snip>
| Quote: |
The router is a wireless router, but it has 5 ports on it as well.
Obviously one of the ports is the feed, and four of them are nodes. I
think this makes a router handle traffic sorta like a hub, or allows
hub-like configuration.
No its a router ! Each port can handle anything from one machine upto
the maximum for that router. My router "Draytec" has four ports. Each
port can handle upto the maximum number of computers that the router
has address space. In my case 1024 machines. Or 256 machines per port.
|
<snip>
he's right..
according to what I have heard, these routers being sold with many
ports , are not like cisco routers whose ports are router ports.
The ports are ports of a switch (a switch is of course similar to a
hub, so he's right in his general idea). I don't know where he gets
his terminology of "feed" and "node" from though, or how he figured it
out. It uses some kind of layer 3 switch, so it's not obvious. I only
know 'cos that's what I keep hearing when chatting to people. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Baron
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 1:36 am Post subject: Re: Network Question |
|
|
jameshanley39@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
| Quote: |
On 19 Jun, 11:22, Baron <baron.nos...@linuxmaniac.nospam.net> wrote:
snip
The router is a wireless router, but it has 5 ports on it as well.
Obviously one of the ports is the feed, and four of them are nodes.
I think this makes a router handle traffic sorta like a hub, or
allows hub-like configuration.
No its a router ! Â Each port can handle anything from one machine
upto the maximum for that router. Â My router "Draytec" has four
ports. Â Each port can handle upto the maximum number of computers
that the router has address space. Â In my case 1024 machines. Or 256
machines per port.
snip
he's right..
according to what I have heard, these routers being sold with many
ports, are not like cisco routers whose ports are router ports.
The ports are ports of a switch (a switch is of course similar to a
hub, so he's right in his general idea). I don't know where he gets
his terminology of "feed" and "node" from though, or how he figured it
out. It uses some kind of layer 3 switch, so it's not obvious. I only
know 'cos that's what I keep hearing when chatting to people.
|
Hi James,
I think there is some confusion in interpretation here !
I suppose technically the ADSL/cable modem are both router and switch.
If it were a hub then you wouldn't get the full 100 Mbs on each port
where as with a switch you do. Having multiple ports is very
convenient.
--
Best Regards:
Baron. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
jameshanley39@yahoo.co.uk
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 9:09 am Post subject: Re: Network Question |
|
|
On Jun 19, 9:36 pm, Baron <baron.nos...@linuxmaniac.nospam.net> wrote:
| Quote: |
jameshanle...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
On 19 Jun, 11:22, Baron <baron.nos...@linuxmaniac.nospam.net> wrote:
snip
The router is a wireless router, but it has 5 ports on it as well.
Obviously one of the ports is the feed, and four of them are nodes.
I think this makes a router handle traffic sorta like a hub, or
allows hub-like configuration.
No its a router ! Each port can handle anything from one machine
upto the maximum for that router. My router "Draytec" has four
ports. Each port can handle upto the maximum number of computers
that the router has address space. In my case 1024 machines. Or 256
machines per port.
snip
he's right..
according to what I have heard, these routers being sold with many
ports, are not like cisco routers whose ports are router ports.
The ports are ports of a switch (a switch is of course similar to a
hub, so he's right in his general idea). I don't know where he gets
his terminology of "feed" and "node" from though, or how he figured it
out. It uses some kind of layer 3 switch, so it's not obvious. I only
know 'cos that's what I keep hearing when chatting to people.
Hi James,
I think there is some confusion in interpretation here !
I suppose technically the ADSL/cable modem are both router and switch.
If it were a hub then you wouldn't get the full 100 Mbs on each port
where as with a switch you do. Having multiple ports is very
convenient.
--
|
how did you discern that it was switch ports and not router ports?
some pro routers do have many (router) ports. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
jameshanley39@yahoo.co.uk
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 9:39 am Post subject: Re: Network Question |
|
|
On Jun 20, 10:09 am, "jameshanle...@yahoo.co.uk"
<jameshanle...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
| Quote: |
On Jun 19, 9:36 pm, Baron <baron.nos...@linuxmaniac.nospam.net> wrote:
jameshanle...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
On 19 Jun, 11:22, Baron <baron.nos...@linuxmaniac.nospam.net> wrote:
snip
The router is a wireless router, but it has 5 ports on it as well.
Obviously one of the ports is the feed, and four of them are nodes..
I think this makes a router handle traffic sorta like a hub, or
allows hub-like configuration.
No its a router ! Each port can handle anything from one machine
upto the maximum for that router. My router "Draytec" has four
ports. Each port can handle upto the maximum number of computers
that the router has address space. In my case 1024 machines. Or 256
machines per port.
snip
he's right..
according to what I have heard, these routers being sold with many
ports, are not like cisco routers whose ports are router ports.
The ports are ports of a switch (a switch is of course similar to a
hub, so he's right in his general idea). I don't know where he gets
his terminology of "feed" and "node" from though, or how he figured it
out. It uses some kind of layer 3 switch, so it's not obvious. I only
know 'cos that's what I keep hearing when chatting to people.
Hi James,
I think there is some confusion in interpretation here !
I suppose technically the ADSL/cable modem are both router and switch.
If it were a hub then you wouldn't get the full 100 Mbs on each port
where as with a switch you do. Having multiple ports is very
convenient.
--
how did you discern that it was switch ports and not router ports?
some pro routers do have many (router) ports.- Hide quoted text -
|
I guess I am a bit rusty..
I will try to correct myself
The things known through marketing as ADSL modems, have a router
inside, and a routing table, but connect to a switch on the outside of
the box, using it to get the many ports
,
the things known through marketing as Routers, are truly routers ,
they have many router ports..
L3 switch , apparently, is an improvement on a router, and differs
only in the hardware, so, same logic, and indistinguishable from the
outside.
routing is a function, so hence I have heard that a L3 switch is a
router. (based on http://compnetworking.about.com/od/hardwarenetworkgear/f/layer3switches.htm
)
The only IPs and subnet on a so-called ADSL/Cable modem, would be
the 1 subnet it lets you define, and the ones sent out to computers
vis DHCP.
A Router (for home routers - those home routers with an ethernet WAN
port instead of a modem telephone socket), are perhaps multiple
port Routers / L3 switches. So those ports are from a functional
perspective, Router ports. I guess, that like the pro routers, they
let you configure the subnet at each port.
The pro routers have always had many router ports I think.. (and I
suppose they may even have an a telephone socket for a modem )
The statement I have so often heard, that NAT Routers are not Routers,
is I suppose completely false.
The ADSL modem ones, have a router inside but many switch ports.
The rest, those advertised as Routers, they really are Routers like
any other..
I don't know about NAT getting in the way.. I think it can be turned
off and perhaps then the only difference between it and a professional
cisco like router would be fine adjustments like enabling/disabling a
port, more choices of routing protocols, choice of WAN ports (not just
ethernet), ..
. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Baron
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 6:44 pm Post subject: Re: Network Question |
|
|
jameshanley39@yahoo.co.uk Inscribed thus:
| Quote: |
On Jun 20, 10:09Â am, "jameshanle...@yahoo.co.uk"
jameshanle...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
On Jun 19, 9:36Â pm, Baron <baron.nos...@linuxmaniac.nospam.net
wrote:
jameshanle...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
On 19 Jun, 11:22, Baron <baron.nos...@linuxmaniac.nospam.net
wrote: <snip
The router is a wireless router, but it has 5 ports on it as
well. Obviously one of the ports is the feed, and four of them
are nodes. I think this makes a router handle traffic sorta
like a hub, or allows hub-like configuration.
No its a router ! Â Each port can handle anything from one
machine upto the maximum for that router. Â My router "Draytec"
has four ports. Â Each port can handle upto the maximum number of
computers that the router has address space. Â In my case 1024
machines. Or 256 machines per port.
snip
he's right..
according to what I have heard, these routers being sold with
many ports, are not like cisco routers whose ports are router
ports.
The ports are ports of a switch (a switch is of course similar to
a hub, so he's right in his general idea). Â I don't know where he
gets his terminology of "feed" and "node" from though, or how he
figured it out. It uses some kind of layer 3 switch, so it's not
obvious. I only know 'cos that's what I keep hearing when
chatting to people.
Hi James,
I think there is some confusion in interpretation here !
I suppose technically the ADSL/cable modem are both router and
switch. If it were a hub then you wouldn't get the full 100 Mbs on
each port where as with a switch you do. Â Having multiple ports is
very convenient.
--
how did you discern that it was switch ports and not router ports?
some pro routers do have many (router) ports.- Hide quoted text -
I guess I am a bit rusty..
I will try to correct myself
|
Don't worry about it. Marketing tends to thrive on confusion !
| Quote: |
The things known through marketing as ADSL modems, have a router
inside, and a routing table, but connect to a switch on the outside of
the box, using it to get the many ports
,
the things known through marketing as Routers, are truly routers ,
they have many router ports..
L3 switch , apparently, is an improvement on a router, and differs
only in the hardware, so, same logic, and indistinguishable from the
outside. routing is a function, so hence I have heard that a L3 switch
is a router. (based on
http://compnetworking.about.com/od/hardwarenetworkgear/f/layer3switches.htm
)
The only IPs and subnet on a so-called ADSL/Cable modem, would be
the 1 subnet it lets you define, and the ones sent out to computers
vis DHCP.
A Router (for home routers - those home routers with an ethernet WAN
port instead of a modem telephone socket), are perhaps multiple
port Routers / L3 switches. So those ports are from a functional
perspective, Router ports. I guess, that like the pro routers, they
let you configure the subnet at each port.
|
In my experience ADSL vis POTS and ADSL via WAN is very often just the
same device but with a different input circuit !
| Quote: |
The pro routers have always had many router ports I think.. (and I
suppose they may even have an a telephone socket for a modem )
The statement I have so often heard, that NAT Routers are not Routers,
is I suppose completely false.
|
NAT, Network address translation is a simple router function.
| Quote: |
The ADSL modem ones, have a router inside but many switch ports.
The rest, those advertised as Routers, they really are Routers like
any other..
I don't know about NAT getting in the way.. I think it can be turned
off and perhaps then the only difference between it and a professional
cisco like router would be fine adjustments like enabling/disabling a
port, more choices of routing protocols, choice of WAN ports (not just
ethernet), ..
|
Turning off NAT would be the equivalent of bridging and in those
circumstances the lan ports are a simple switch. The incoming IP would
simply be passed on through the switch. Whatever was connected to the
switch would have to do any routing if it was needed.
With home networks little thought is needed to setup a network of
multiple machines, just make sure that DHCP is turned on and plug them
in.
--
Best Regards:
Baron. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
jameshanley39@yahoo.co.uk
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 6:50 pm Post subject: Re: Network Question |
|
|
On Jun 20, 2:44 pm, Baron <baron.nos...@linuxmaniac.nospam.net> wrote:
| Quote: |
jameshanle...@yahoo.co.uk Inscribed thus:
On Jun 20, 10:09 am, "jameshanle...@yahoo.co.uk"
jameshanle...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
On Jun 19, 9:36 pm, Baron <baron.nos...@linuxmaniac.nospam.net
wrote:
jameshanle...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
On 19 Jun, 11:22, Baron <baron.nos...@linuxmaniac.nospam.net
wrote: <snip
The router is a wireless router, but it has 5 ports on it as
well. Obviously one of the ports is the feed, and four of them
are nodes. I think this makes a router handle traffic sorta
like a hub, or allows hub-like configuration.
No its a router ! Each port can handle anything from one
machine upto the maximum for that router. My router "Draytec"
has four ports. Each port can handle upto the maximum number of
computers that the router has address space. In my case 1024
machines. Or 256 machines per port.
snip
he's right..
according to what I have heard, these routers being sold with
many ports, are not like cisco routers whose ports are router
ports.
The ports are ports of a switch (a switch is of course similar to
a hub, so he's right in his general idea). I don't know where he
gets his terminology of "feed" and "node" from though, or how he
figured it out. It uses some kind of layer 3 switch, so it's not
obvious. I only know 'cos that's what I keep hearing when
chatting to people.
Hi James,
I think there is some confusion in interpretation here !
I suppose technically the ADSL/cable modem are both router and
switch. If it were a hub then you wouldn't get the full 100 Mbs on
each port where as with a switch you do. Having multiple ports is
very convenient.
--
how did you discern that it was switch ports and not router ports?
some pro routers do have many (router) ports.- Hide quoted text -
I guess I am a bit rusty..
I will try to correct myself
Don't worry about it. Marketing tends to thrive on confusion !
The things known through marketing as ADSL modems, have a router
inside, and a routing table, but connect to a switch on the outside of
the box, using it to get the many ports
,
the things known through marketing as Routers, are truly routers ,
they have many router ports..
L3 switch , apparently, is an improvement on a router, and differs
only in the hardware, so, same logic, and indistinguishable from the
outside. routing is a function, so hence I have heard that a L3 switch
is a router. (based on
http://compnetworking.about.com/od/hardwarenetworkgear/f/layer3switch...
)
The only IPs and subnet on a so-called ADSL/Cable modem, would be
the 1 subnet it lets you define, and the ones sent out to computers
vis DHCP.
A Router (for home routers - those home routers with an ethernet WAN
port instead of a modem telephone socket), are perhaps multiple
port Routers / L3 switches. So those ports are from a functional
perspective, Router ports. I guess, that like the pro routers, they
let you configure the subnet at each port.
In my experience ADSL vis POTS and ADSL via WAN is very often just the
same device but with a different input circuit !
|
any examples of make/models of router-modems with full router
functionality?
From what I have seen, the router-modems switch ports.
And from what I have heard. The routers without the modem, I suppose
are routers, ports are router ports, you can define a subnet on each
port. It routes between ports.
| Quote: |
The pro routers have always had many router ports I think.. (and I
suppose they may even have an a telephone socket for a modem )
The statement I have so often heard, that NAT Routers are not Routers,
is I suppose completely false.
NAT, Network address translation is a simple router function.
|
certainly isn't.. no book or article would say so because it's false.
NAT is a function and Routing is a function . just like DHCP is a
function.
They might put it all in the same box and throw a modem in there too,
and call it a Router, but that doesn't make DHCP a router function ,
it doesn't make a modem part of a router.
The word router really applies to a function.
Saying otherwise is getting confused by marketting.
| Quote: |
The ADSL modem ones, have a router inside but many switch ports.
The rest, those advertised as Routers, they really are Routers like
any other..
I don't know about NAT getting in the way.. I think it can be turned
off and perhaps then the only difference between it and a professional
cisco like router would be fine adjustments like enabling/disabling a
port, more choices of routing protocols, choice of WAN ports (not just
ethernet), ..
Turning off NAT would be the equivalent of bridging and in those
circumstances the lan ports are a simple switch. The incoming IP would
simply be passed on through the switch. Whatever was connected to the
switch would have to do any routing if it was needed.
|
Regarding the "adsl modems", I can see how turning off NAT would make
it just a bridge/switch.
But regarding the "routers". I am sure people use them by connecting
them to a " router- dsl modem box" Or, connecting them to a cable
modem. And so in that situation, they do routing and don't do NAT.
So you are turning NAT off, and it's not acting like a switch, it acts
like a router. I think the things marketted as routers , their ports
are router ports not switch ports. Unlike the things marketted as
"adsl modems"
<snip> |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Baron
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 21, 2008 12:52 am Post subject: Re: Network Question |
|
|
jameshanley39@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
| Quote: |
NAT, Network address translation is a simple router function.
certainly isn't.. no book or article would say so because it's false.
NAT is a function and Routing is a function . just like DHCP is a
function.
|
I would disagree with you. NAT more accurately NAPT is a routing
function and not strictly a function in its own right independent of
routing. The two go hand in hand.
| Quote: |
They might put it all in the same box and throw a modem in there too,
and call it a Router, but that doesn't make DHCP a router function ,
|
I don't recall saying DHCP was a router function ! I did say :-
"The other side of the router hands out addresses to the machines as
they request them via DHCP."
| Quote: |
it doesn't make a modem part of a router.
|
I agree it doesn't !
| Quote: |
The word router really applies to a function.
Saying otherwise is getting confused by marketting.
|
Thats what marketing is good at !
--
Best Regards:
Baron. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Jeff Strickland
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 21, 2008 5:29 am Post subject: Re: Network Question |
|
|
"Baron" <baron.nospam@linuxmaniac.nospam.net> wrote in message
news:g3dc00$hgh$1@registered.motzarella.org...
| Quote: |
I have not had the pleasure of a "Verizon Card" ! I assume that its
similar to an internal network card ?
|
It's a cell-based card that gives a wifi connection -- I think it is wifi.
The area is remote, and is not served by DSL or broadband. The owner
formerly did a dial-up, but it was too slow. Now he gets online with a card
from Verizon that leverages the cell service.
Thanks for the information. It sounds as if it ought to be pretty straight
forward. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
102 Attacks blocked
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
