LAN Segregation

OG wrote:
LEGEND
-- Internet
++ WiFi
== Cat5

---------- ROOM 1 BACK OF HOUSE ------
ISP -- ATT (internet + phone)
ATT++Cam1
ATT++Laptop1
ATT==Switch1 1000Mb
Switch1===PC (A) Multimedia Source
Switch1==NAS1
------- ROOM 2 FRONT OF HOUSE -----
Switch1==R20000 WiFi Router
R20000++Cam2
R20000++Laptop2
R20000==NAS2
------- ROOM 3 FRONT OF HOUSE -----
R20000==Switch2 1000Mb
Switch2== PC (B) Viewer
Switch2== Laptop3


Char presented an isolation method near the beginning of the thread.

http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi...1%404ax.com%3E

I'm still trying to figure out, how comms from (B)
to (A), are going through the ATT 10/100 port.
The traffic does appear to go through the
wired R20000 ports. But doesn't have to
touch the ATT, unless some funky routing
is going on which isn't shown in the picture.

switch --- PC (A)
--- R20000 --- switch --- PC(B)

I wonder if the Wifi on PC (A) and PC (B),
the radio on those is switched off ?

Paul

Paul wrote:
OG wrote:
LEGEND
-- Internet
++ WiFi
== Cat5

---------- ROOM 1 BACK OF HOUSE ------
ISP -- ATT (internet + phone)
ATT++Cam1
ATT++Laptop1
ATT==Switch1 1000Mb
Switch1===PC (A) Multimedia Source
Switch1==NAS1
------- ROOM 2 FRONT OF HOUSE -----
Switch1==R20000 WiFi Router
R20000++Cam2
R20000++Laptop2
R20000==NAS2
------- ROOM 3 FRONT OF HOUSE -----
R20000==Switch2 1000Mb
Switch2== PC (B) Viewer
Switch2== Laptop3


Char presented an isolation method near the beginning of the thread.

http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi...1%404ax.com%3E


I'm still trying to figure out, how comms from (B)
to (A), are going through the ATT 10/100 port.
The traffic does appear to go through the
wired R20000 ports. But doesn't have to
touch the ATT, unless some funky routing
is going on which isn't shown in the picture.

switch --- PC (A)
--- R20000 --- switch --- PC(B)

I wonder if the Wifi on PC (A) and PC (B),
the radio on those is switched off ?

Paul

The TV files are housed on (A) and viewed on (B); ATT not involved in
that traffic directly (but because it is on the LAN it sees it? Since
it is a 10/100 , as someone suggested in a post, device does that slow
the overall LAN traffic?)
Something is flooding the LAN with data and going to or from the ATT;
this traffic kills the TV file viewing so if I unplug the ATT Cat5 to
the rest of the LAN the LAN speed goes to full speed. Now this does not
happen all the time when watching the TV files. But when it does it
kills viewing. I have tried killing apps on the viewing PC (B) like NAS
apps but got inconsistent results.

WiFi on all devices is active and used.
The IP address range is set to not overlap on the ATT and R20000.
R20000 only acts as WiFi at that end of the house and as a Cat5 router.


I am not familiar with the posted isolation suggestion and need to study
it. Too much new terminology. My pea brain does not think I will
understand it.



--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

On Tue, 24 May 2016 07:23:00 -0700, OG wrote:

The TV files are housed on (A) and viewed on (B); ATT not involved in
that traffic directly (but because it is on the LAN it sees it?

No. "Switched" networks don't work that way. Switches receive traffic on one
of their ports and in turn they send that traffic out only one of their
other ports. That's different, and much more efficient, than the old days
where a "hub" would receive traffic on one of its ports and flood that
traffic out each of its other ports. Hubs have all but disappeared now. I
haven't seen one in at least 20 years.


Since it is a 10/100 , as someone suggested in a post, device does that slow
the overall LAN traffic?)

Follow the path from PC(A) to PC(B). The overall speed between those two PCs
will be the speed of the slowest link in that path.

PC(A) is connected to Switch1 at 10/100/1000 Mbps (Pick one)
Switch1 is connected to Switch2 at 10/100/1000 Mbps (pick one)
Switch2 is connected to PC(B) at 10/100/1000 Mbps (pick one)

If you picked 1000 for each of the links above, then the overall speed is
1000 Mbps. If any link was 100, though, then the overall speed is 100 Mbps.


Something is flooding the LAN with data and going to or from the ATT;
this traffic kills the TV file viewing so if I unplug the ATT Cat5 to
the rest of the LAN the LAN speed goes to full speed. Now this does not
happen all the time when watching the TV files. But when it does it
kills viewing. I have tried killing apps on the viewing PC (B) like NAS
apps but got inconsistent results.

Every recent version of Windows includes a rudimentary network traffic
monitor as part of the Task Manager app. It won't show you what kind of
traffic you're looking at or where it's going, but it will show you how much
traffic is flowing in/out of that individual PC. When you think the local
connection should be quiet, look at Task Manager and see if it's really
quiet. Do the same on both PCs, (A) and (B). If either of them is already
dealing with a ton of traffic before you even start watching video, then
your viewing will naturally suffer. With that info in hand, though, we can
start to track down the issue.


WiFi on all devices is active and used.
The IP address range is set to not overlap on the ATT and R20000.
R20000 only acts as WiFi at that end of the house and as a Cat5 router.

Simple yes/no question: Does that R20000 have anything plugged into its WAN
port?


I am not familiar with the posted isolation suggestion and need to study
it. Too much new terminology. My pea brain does not think I will
understand it.

I invited you to ask clarifying questions. :-)


Question: can you rearrange the network so that PC(A) and PC(B) are
connected to the same switch? Making them more local to each other can
possibly help and certainly won't hurt.

--

Char Jackson

R2000 WAN port is empty. Only ATT has direct internet/phone connection.

Unfortunately my house wiring necessitates my current switch situation.

These are dumb switches so I think that means they all do 1000 Mb on all
ports.

I did think about buying smart switches where I could program the speed
of each port but did not follow through.

I read somewhere that the switch capability, even those designated at
1000Mb, were actually more dependent on the "fabric" speed, i.e. the
ability of the switch internally to give max speed for all traffic but I
never found anyone specifying "fabric" speed.

If there is no data flooding then the (A) to (B) speed is more than
adequate.

I used that previously posted LAN Speed program to check the (A) to (B)
speed and it is obvious when flooding is or is not present.



--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

On Tue, 24 May 2016 09:58:10 -0700, OG wrote:

R2000 WAN port is empty.

Good! Sometimes people connect the WAN port of the second router to a LAN
port on the first router, but you've avoided that.


Only ATT has direct internet/phone connection.

Well, that wouldn't have given direct Internet access to the second router.
It would only have resulted in you having two separate LANs that need to
route to each other. You would have had a routed network rather than a
switched network. You've chosen the simpler, preferred, approach.


Unfortunately my house wiring necessitates my current switch situation.

These are dumb switches so I think that means they all do 1000 Mb on all
ports.

No, dumb or smart only refers to whether the switch is 'managed' or
'unmanaged'. On the surface, it has nothing to do with the speed, although
some managed switches may let you step the speed down. What are the make and
model of your switches?


I did think about buying smart switches where I could program the speed
of each port but did not follow through.

There's no reason to spend money on that. The primary purpose of a managed
switch is so that the admin (you) can segment the switch into two or more
logical switches. So far, I'm not seeing a use for that in your case, but
the jury is still out.


I read somewhere that the switch capability, even those designated at
1000Mb, were actually more dependent on the "fabric" speed, i.e. the
ability of the switch internally to give max speed for all traffic but I
never found anyone specifying "fabric" speed.

Fabric refers to the internal chip that connects all of the switch ports to
each other. You're right, that can sometimes be a bottleneck.


If there is no data flooding then the (A) to (B) speed is more than
adequate.

I know what you mean, but in a switched network like yours there is no
flooding. Switches don't allow it under normal circumstances. Normal traffic
will have a single destination and will not be broadcast to everything on
the LAN.


I used that previously posted LAN Speed program to check the (A) to (B)
speed and it is obvious when flooding is or is not present.

Great! Which PC experienced the heavy traffic? You can use the Networking
tab in Task Manager to see your connection speed and you can also see how
much traffic is flowing. Check there, on both PCs, when the network is quiet
and again when "flooding" is present. We should be able to find the culprit
very quickly.


--

Char Jackson

Char Jackson wrote:

Well, that wouldn't have given direct Internet access to the second router.
It would only have resulted in you having two separate LANs that need to
route to each other. You would have had a routed network rather than a
switched network. You've chosen the simpler, preferred, approach.


With the ATT isolated (ATT thru wifi access only to the internet) by
disconnecting the Cat5 to the first switch if have this situation:

Laptop using wifi only connect, can see the ATT and the R20000 strong
signal level but can only connect to the ATT (giving wifi to internet
access OK) and cannot connect to the R20000 (to give me all the
remaining LAN to PC and NAS access) Why is that?

I do not think that is related to the flooding problems but is another
problem.


I used that previously posted LAN Speed program to check the (A) to (B)
speed and it is obvious when flooding is or is not present.

Great! Which PC experienced the heavy traffic? You can use the Networking
tab in Task Manager to see your connection speed and you can also see how
much traffic is flowing. Check there, on both PCs, when the network is quiet
and again when "flooding" is present. We should be able to find the culprit
very quickly.


I will have to see, since when it was happening I tried from (B) to (A)
and saw the "flooding" slowdown.
When not "flooding" for (B) to (A) was fast; with ATT connected. With
ATT disconnected I never see "flooding" and (B) to (A) is always fast.



--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

On Tue, 24 May 2016 11:58:31 -0700, OG wrote:

With the ATT isolated (ATT thru wifi access only to the internet) by
disconnecting the Cat5 to the first switch if have this situation:

Laptop using wifi only connect, can see the ATT and the R20000 strong
signal level but can only connect to the ATT (giving wifi to internet
access OK) and cannot connect to the R20000 (to give me all the
remaining LAN to PC and NAS access) Why is that?

All of the standard questions apply. Off the top of my head:
1. Is it the right SSID? This one is obvious, but I had to ask.

2. Are you being asked for a password? If not, it's possible that the wrong
password is cached in the laptop and you should "forget" the R20000 so you
can start fresh.

3. Are you using the right password? You wouldn't be the first person who
repeatedly tried the wrong password.

4. Is there a mismatch in the supported WiFi standards? Not all WiFi is
alike. There is 802.11a, 802.11b, 802.11g, 802.11n, and 802.11ac, all in
fairly common use these days. So for example, if the laptop can only do
802.11b and the router can only do 802.11g, you won't be able to connect.

5. Can other laptops and devices connect OK to the R20000?

I do not think that is related to the flooding problems but is another
problem.

Agreed, it's a separate problem.

--

Char Jackson

Char Jackson wrote:
On Tue, 24 May 2016 11:58:31 -0700, OG wrote:

With the ATT isolated (ATT thru wifi access only to the internet) by
disconnecting the Cat5 to the first switch if have this situation:

Laptop using wifi only connect, can see the ATT and the R20000 strong
signal level but can only connect to the ATT (giving wifi to internet
access OK) and cannot connect to the R20000 (to give me all the
remaining LAN to PC and NAS access) Why is that?

All of the standard questions apply. Off the top of my head:
1. Is it the right SSID? This one is obvious, but I had to ask.

2. Are you being asked for a password? If not, it's possible that the wrong
password is cached in the laptop and you should "forget" the R20000 so you
can start fresh.

3. Are you using the right password? You wouldn't be the first person who
repeatedly tried the wrong password.

4. Is there a mismatch in the supported WiFi standards? Not all WiFi is
alike. There is 802.11a, 802.11b, 802.11g, 802.11n, and 802.11ac, all in
fairly common use these days. So for example, if the laptop can only do
802.11b and the router can only do 802.11g, you won't be able to connect.

5. Can other laptops and devices connect OK to the R20000?

I do not think that is related to the flooding problems but is another
problem.

Agreed, it's a separate problem.


Before the ATT disconnect R20000 wifi and Cat5 worked.

With ATT disconnected as described, two laptops that previously
connected, one 5GHz the other 2.4GHz worked, WiFi Camera previously
connected worked but now does not.

May be something happened to the R20000????

But Cat5 from PC or Laptop to switch sees all on this portion of the LAN
including other PCs and NASes. But then they do not go through the
R20000. R20000 has only one Cat5 in/out and that is to the switch.

Also, two Win 7 PCs and Laptop, hang, slow way down and the mouse jerks
all over for several minutes when I try to connect them to the R2000
WiFI. Poor Win 7 programming??? Or???
All very frustrating.

Yes I run virus scanners: Malwarebytes, SuperAntiSpyware, Spybot and
Spyware Blaster. Win 7 PC has MS virus scanner.



--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

On Tue, 24 May 2016 16:30:20 -0700, OG wrote:

Char Jackson wrote:
On Tue, 24 May 2016 11:58:31 -0700, OG wrote:

With the ATT isolated (ATT thru wifi access only to the internet) by
disconnecting the Cat5 to the first switch if have this situation:

Laptop using wifi only connect, can see the ATT and the R20000 strong
signal level but can only connect to the ATT (giving wifi to internet
access OK) and cannot connect to the R20000 (to give me all the
remaining LAN to PC and NAS access) Why is that?

All of the standard questions apply. Off the top of my head:
1. Is it the right SSID? This one is obvious, but I had to ask.

2. Are you being asked for a password? If not, it's possible that the wrong
password is cached in the laptop and you should "forget" the R20000 so you
can start fresh.

3. Are you using the right password? You wouldn't be the first person who
repeatedly tried the wrong password.

4. Is there a mismatch in the supported WiFi standards? Not all WiFi is
alike. There is 802.11a, 802.11b, 802.11g, 802.11n, and 802.11ac, all in
fairly common use these days. So for example, if the laptop can only do
802.11b and the router can only do 802.11g, you won't be able to connect.

5. Can other laptops and devices connect OK to the R20000?

I do not think that is related to the flooding problems but is another
problem.

Agreed, it's a separate problem.


Before the ATT disconnect R20000 wifi and Cat5 worked.

With ATT disconnected as described, two laptops that previously
connected, one 5GHz the other 2.4GHz worked, WiFi Camera previously
connected worked but now does not.

May be something happened to the R20000????

But Cat5 from PC or Laptop to switch sees all on this portion of the LAN
including other PCs and NASes. But then they do not go through the
R20000. R20000 has only one Cat5 in/out and that is to the switch.

Also, two Win 7 PCs and Laptop, hang, slow way down and the mouse jerks
all over for several minutes when I try to connect them to the R2000
WiFI. Poor Win 7 programming??? Or???
All very frustrating.

Yes I run virus scanners: Malwarebytes, SuperAntiSpyware, Spybot and
Spyware Blaster. Win 7 PC has MS virus scanner.

I'm not sure if you answered any of my questions, so maybe we should leave
this alone and focus on the other stuff.

--

Char Jackson