Network "Re-Design"

[nayr]

when your desktop and BI server talk to eachother, they are limited by 100Mbit Fast Ethernet connection.. you wont get GigE speeds between the two.. if you put them both on the same switch, they will have 10x more throughput.

Two devices on the same switch can talk to eachother directly, without leaving the switch.. so you have full speed between them, and all the other ports on the switch are unaffected.

Two Devices on different switches can only talk to eachother via the Uplink between the switches, so if you have two devices talking at full speed on separate switches.. the uplink is now saturated and there is nothing left for any other network devices.. any traffic transiting from one switch to another has to share the throughput of the uplink. (100Mbit FastEthernet in your case)

Its always best to have a core/trunk switch with all the network devices terminating into it, than it is to branch off a bunch of switches linked together.. if all you have is a large trunk switch capable of handling all your network devices you'll never worry about uplink saturation and many performance bottlenecks that can be encountered with branches.

If you uplink only your router to your trunk/core switch, that 100Mbit link wont ever get saturated unless your internet is faster than that.. because your internet will max out before the uplink... two computers on the same network can very quickly saturate 100Mbit, as most modern hard drives are capable of much more than that.. so simply downloading a recording between the two is capable of choking the network.

 

[dryfly]

Nayr,

That makes sense! I guess the only thing I'm not sure of is when my desktop would ever need to communicate with my BI server. But, anyway think I'll reroute my cables to have all network devices terminate into the gig switch. It will at least physically clean up my cables.

I've got two 1.2mp cameras and one 3mp cameras going into the 10/100 switch. And then I've uplinked that switch to the gig switch which support my remaining cameras. Nothing wrong with that, right?

 

[Optimus Prime]

@nayr I have a 24 port D-Link gigabit un-managed switch, and a Verizon FIOS Router/AP (cannot be upgraded to DDWRT). I was planning on buying a dedicated AP and a bridge AP so that FIOS router can focus solely on serving the internet and routing.

Do you have a recommendation on an AP?

• Should I pickup a higher end residential router/APs? Or would you recommend picking up something commercial (Ubiquiti)?
• Do you think there is a performance increase in a residential setting by running a standalone router?

My load is going to be

• Hardwired - 5 TVs, 3 RaspPi, 4 computers (two office, one BI, one file server), AP, Roku, PS3, 8 cameras
• Wireless - everything else in the house (iPads, iPhones, 3 Laptops, guests)

Thanks.

 

[nayr]

Ubiquiti AC Access Points, just be carefull.. I just nuked two of mine on accident when rewiring my network, accidently pluged them into standard 48v poe instead of Ubiquiti's 24v poe and I let the smoke out

still going to buy more and replace em, they are damn fast.. and cheap.

 

[Cupofschmoe]

Bumping this old thread.

I was curious as to why one would hook up cameras on separate switches that are attached to the backbone?
Is it just some failsafe thing to do to prevent all cameras going out at once if the switch takes a dump?

 

[alastairstevenson]

I was curious as to why one would hook up cameras on separate switches that are attached to the backbone?

Cabling topology?

 

[Cupofschmoe]

Makes a lot of sense!