JMF
June 15th 03, 09:09 AM
Question: Can a LAN switch be used in conjunction with a DSL 4-port router
(via router's uplink post), to multiply the number of PCs that can be used
on the LAN?
Not sure if this question belongs in a Hardware newsgroup, or Networking
newsgroup -- so am posting both places! Here's the background and detail on
my question:
I have a home LAN system that uses Internet Connection Sharing for our four
PCs, driven by a WinXP box and XP's cool little Networking wizard. A
Linksys 8-post switch is the device I use for linking all the PC's of our
network. Everything works fine. But...
A friend recently convinced me I should switch to the use of a router, due
to the increased security afforded by a hardware firewall, rather than
WinXP's software firewall on my current system.
Happily, I recently found one of Linksys' low-end (Networked Everywhere)
routers on sale, so decided to give it a try. Problem is that the router
includes only a 4-port switch. And even though we have only 4 PC's on our
home LAN, I have other Ethernet cables run to places of convenience for use
of notebook PCs in the house, away from usual desk settings. Thus, I want
to use the 8-port switch, uplinked from the router, so that I can have all
of my Ethernet cables plugged in when needed.
So what's the problem?
My friend who persuaded me to purchase the router is telling me that it's a
bad idea to use the switch. He claims I'll have packet crashes, but one of
the things I learned when studying Networking last year, from setting up my
current system, is that switches avoid the packet crashing that was common
with hubs. Friend says I should buy an 8-port router instead. Seems like
overkill to me, especially since I've already invested money in the switch
and it's been working fine.
I have talked with Linksys Tech Support, and they say my plan to increase
the DSL/LAN signal to other PCs via an uplink connection to the 8-port
switch is a common and OK method of increasing number of PCs on a LAN.
Thus, I gave it a try with one of our PCs, and everything seems to be
working fine.
Does anyone see any reason why I should NOT continue using this method?
--
John M. Fischer <*(((><
Portland, Oregon, USA
(via router's uplink post), to multiply the number of PCs that can be used
on the LAN?
Not sure if this question belongs in a Hardware newsgroup, or Networking
newsgroup -- so am posting both places! Here's the background and detail on
my question:
I have a home LAN system that uses Internet Connection Sharing for our four
PCs, driven by a WinXP box and XP's cool little Networking wizard. A
Linksys 8-post switch is the device I use for linking all the PC's of our
network. Everything works fine. But...
A friend recently convinced me I should switch to the use of a router, due
to the increased security afforded by a hardware firewall, rather than
WinXP's software firewall on my current system.
Happily, I recently found one of Linksys' low-end (Networked Everywhere)
routers on sale, so decided to give it a try. Problem is that the router
includes only a 4-port switch. And even though we have only 4 PC's on our
home LAN, I have other Ethernet cables run to places of convenience for use
of notebook PCs in the house, away from usual desk settings. Thus, I want
to use the 8-port switch, uplinked from the router, so that I can have all
of my Ethernet cables plugged in when needed.
So what's the problem?
My friend who persuaded me to purchase the router is telling me that it's a
bad idea to use the switch. He claims I'll have packet crashes, but one of
the things I learned when studying Networking last year, from setting up my
current system, is that switches avoid the packet crashing that was common
with hubs. Friend says I should buy an 8-port router instead. Seems like
overkill to me, especially since I've already invested money in the switch
and it's been working fine.
I have talked with Linksys Tech Support, and they say my plan to increase
the DSL/LAN signal to other PCs via an uplink connection to the 8-port
switch is a common and OK method of increasing number of PCs on a LAN.
Thus, I gave it a try with one of our PCs, and everything seems to be
working fine.
Does anyone see any reason why I should NOT continue using this method?
--
John M. Fischer <*(((><
Portland, Oregon, USA