Way To Use Single Switch Instead Of The 2 Hubs - Slow Network
Oct 28, 2011
having problems with a slow network at work.. ive just become resonsible for the network and inherited a lot of ancient kit.upstairs we have a switch connected to our router.. downstairs we have 2 ancient hubs, daisychained and with 30 devices connected via cat5 and cat5e cable.the question is, if i get the cabling cut, recrimped and all of the cabling connected to the single switch instead of the 2 hubs is there any reason for it not to work, or for performance to be worse?
We use a couple of 2910al ProCurves for our core switching/routing then we have a few 2626 access switches.
Despite allocating adequate ports in our new building, I'm still having a problem with users plugging in shitty little D-Link 5 port hubs at there desk.
I'm guessing I'm going to have to only allow the mac's of approved workstations? Which sounds like a management nightmare.
It should be known that this is not MY specific issue, it's a friend's issue... but I am posting it for him as I know nothing about networking. Don't worry though, anything you post here I will relay for him to do.Is this a wired or wireless connection issue?
Wireless
How to run and post an ipconfig /all output of the computer(s) in question for review.Here it is:
Quote:
Microsoft Windows [Version 6.1.7601] Copyright (c) 2009 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
So here's the deal, my friend has horrible down speed, usually less than 1MB/s according to Speedtest.net, sometimes it hits 2MB/s. However, his brother's in the house have at least 17MB/s, which I can assume is their actual speed that my friend should have... however, he specifically does not.He had a very old wireless card that was installed on his motherboard (desktop PC) that I assumed was the issue upon him first telling me, and from the issues I was personally able to see. For example, he'd constantly disconnect... his internet would just die for him specifically, and then come back. His brother's never lost internet when he did.
After that, I figured his very old wireless card that was installed was just kicking the bucket, so I instructed him to replace it. He went out and bought a new wireless USB adapter, and then uninstalled the network card.Even after all of this, his internet is still poor in terms of down speed. HOWEVER, rather than his internet dying for a few minutes at a time every so often, his internet "stays connected" if that makes sense? For example, we'll be on Skype in a conference call, and his internet will be loading pages very slowly, and Skype will constantly show that it's going from "green - online" to "gray circle - connecting". During this, he's still in Skype, but it's very poor quality from him speaking, and laggy as well.
About a week ago I changed over 9 HP Procurve switches that were previously stacking in series (yeah, daisy-chain) to a Access-Distribution type scenario with 2 (or 4 on server switches) Gb ports on each switch Trunked together connecting to a central full 48x Gb switch.
During this I updated firmwares on all the switches (most still on their shipped 5-8 year old versions) to the latest stable release (and in the process found out that HP switch firmware is absolutely brutal and untested - See ProCurve 2510G FW 11.16 as an example) .
I saw vast improvements across the network immediately after the change (wow, really? 9 48-port switches effectively sharing a single 1Gb line to the servers and internet was a bit slow? Don't tell my co-workers, they don't think that's possible ) .
The only thing that I didn't see an improvement in was on some Linux and BSD servers, which would top out at 11MB/s doing a SMB (SAMBA) transfer. These are managed systems part of our business system, but we still need to be able to pull local backups for ourselves. So I contacted our vendor. The vendor confirmed that the line speed is showing as 1000T-FDx (same as the switch is showing).
Vendor is now claiming that after these changes were put in place, the speed on their servers (and their servers ONLY) was reduced to a maximum of 5MB/s (~60Mb/s?) doing rsync transfers between themselves. And they are all on the same 2510 (48 port all 10/100/1000), which makes absolutely no sense whatsoever to me. Furthermore this is on the ONLY switch on the entire network that had an updated firmware already installed - that's not even a possibility here.
I put some windows servers on that switch and can get 60MB/s+ all day (SMB transfers). I've also tried from their one server that I can access to doing an rsync or scp to another BSD box, and max out at 15MB/s (with 100% CPU usage on the test box - I'm assuming the decryption is pretty heavy?)There is absolutely no QoS, limiting, or any possibility of throttling the links the servers are on the switch. There are no excessive broadcasts saturating it, and the ports and cables test fine.
I have a 3750X 24 port switch (with NM-1G network module) running IOS 15.0(1). Is there any benefit or reason to plug in the included Stack Wise cable and loop it back to itself in a single switch installation?
I don't see any recommendation in the documentation. The data sheet indicates a single switch is a non-blocking device so I'd think there's no bandwidth advantage like there is when connecting an actual multi-switch stack and needing to close the loop for the full 32 Gbps stack bandwidth.
I would like to know if it is possible to assign a 3rd IP address to my end user vlan. Basically the 45xx acts as my end user gateway and has been confirgured as below
interface VlanXX description Main Vlan ip address 2.X.X.X 255.255.255.0 secondary ip address 1.X.X.X 255.255.252.0
[Code].....
Here, due to IP address exhaustion in my end-user network, i want to add one more subnet X.X.X.X/22 to my network and assign one IP more from this range to the above vlan to act as the gateway IP.
I am trying to make the multicast working between few hosts inside a single vlan. Host are running mysql cluster and Multicast is used to send master/slave status information to the IP 228.10.10.10 on port 45566.The vlan is defined in FWSM and the host are connected via the core-switch(6513). (hosts-->core-sws--->fwsm)I have tried searching the documentation, but couldn't find specific info to enable multicast between hosts residing in same vlan. FWSM is running code 3.1(4). since the hosts are residing in the same vlan, I am thinking of applying the <multicast-routing> just for that SVI in FWSM.
I have a live 28port Catalyst 2960S switch. By live I mean that there is an essential piece of equipment plugged into this switch that can suffer little to no downtime. Over the course of time the number of devices patched into this location has increased to exceed the 24 ports available and we have had to resort to adding unmanaged switches to fill the need. We have acquired an additional 2960 & stacking modules that I would like to stack together, keeping the existing switch as the master. It is my understanding that the stacking modules are hot-swappable and that this member switch can be added without bringing the master switch down, thus creating zero down time for the financial server that is connected.
The steps I believe that need to be followed are as such: write mem to existing switch and backup to our TFTP serverinstall the stack module in the existing (while powered up) and new (while powered down)place the 2 redundant FlexStack link cables on both switchesthen simply power the member switch on After boot the member switch will get it's OS and configuration from the master and I can begin moving CAT5 cables from the unmanaged switches to the stack.
I have a requirement to connect two 3750 switch with 10G speed between two sites with 150km distance. We will lay-out our own fiber (48 core) between two sites. I just want to consult the following:
1. Could i use two core switch 6500 with single mode fiber as a transport equipment?
2. Or i need to use SDH equipment because of the distance concern? If so do i need a repeater?Could i use Cisco Metro Core ONS, which one?
Can you configure a Cisco 1941 to use an 8 port EHWic module and the 2 onboard GE ports in a single LAN?
I've discovered you can't have the on GE ports associated with a VLan, and I'm when I've previously researched for a solution, bridging was mentioned but I cannot seem to get it to work (or completely understand it)The reason I would like to use all 10 ports on for the LAN is becuase I have 10 devices I need to connect to the 1941?
I've 4 ISP in my office. In my network all the machines are connected through unmanaged switches.Now if I need to shift any one machine to other ISP then I need to change his IP.Is the following possible:
I connect all the four ISP's to a machine(say Server), then I take out a wire and connect it to the switch so that I can distribute all the ISP into the network.Now on the basis of the MAC Address I can change the assign any ISP to any of the other machine in the network.Also is it possible that I can monitor their data usage as well as can CAP there bandwidth.
I have given IP as mentioned below to 1 to 30 pc connected in First Switch.
IP Starts From : 10.10.10.5 To IP : 10.10.10.30 Subnet Mask: 255.255.255.224 Gateway: 10.10.10.2
For 31 to 50 Pc in Second Switch
IP Starts From : 10.10.10.40 To IP : 10.10.10.65 Subnet Mask: 255.255.255.224 Gateway: 10.10.10.34
IP Starts From : 10.10.10.74 To IP : 10.10.10.85 Subnet Mask: 255.255.255.224 Gateway: 10.10.10.69
Pc are connected internally in separate switch. but can not connect all three switches & with server. Only Gateway 10.10.10.69 is connected with server.
I am in the process of acquiring a static ip address from my isp time Warner. I only want to pay for a single static, but I have a number of machines I want to put on the internet, a web server and a e-mail-server. Using a cisco router, a Cisco Rv 120w. Can I assign the static ip address my isp gave me to the Rv 120w and then crate a vlan to assign addresses to various computers. Or is this something my ISP does. I get the impression from the tech guy at Time Warner that this is something they do.
I have 2 gateway over my network provider to connect to internet.like Gateway1="1.1.1.2" and Gateway2 = "1.1.1.3".but i have only one network adapter with one wire.now i want program to create "Virtual Network adapter" assigned to my real network adapter to set secondary Gateway to it, and use it by "ForceBindip".
i have a BSNL Broadband connection (1st Connection- input via RJ11-telephone line) thru ADSL2 + modem and now i have another Internet connection provided by another ISP(2nd Connection input via DSL - RJ45) thru Asus RT-N10E WireLess router for backup in case 1st ISP fails. now when 1st fails i have to switch to 2nd one manualy.s there a way by which my computer could switch over automatically to 2nd or visa versa to have a seemless connection.2nd issue related to it is that i have my n/w sharedrive and n/w printer connected (Wired) thru 1st Connection. when i switch to 2nd Connection i can only access internet connection but the n/w printer and shared drive are not available.
We have two network (one have internet access and other doesnt have) within a same office and some pcs are connected to both the network using two NIC. So i am planning to implement a router in between those network and as it implement default routing so we can share all the resources. make both the network secure from virus as one of the network should be worm free. What i personally think that implementing a router will reduce worm replication.
I am using D link DIR 615 router for my network. My ISP sent me a letter few days ago that they can provide me total separate wireless connection other than my regular connection. But they will charge me $10/month for this. just wondering do we have any way to create two separate wireless network so that my clients can access that free wireless connection when they are in my store. But on the other side they don't interfere with my regular connection and its good for my network security too.
Our work building currently has 2 separate DSL lines feeding into it, one on each end of the building. The reason for two lines was so each one would have its own bandwidth, thereby supporting more simultaneous users. There is a router connected to the DSL jack at each end of the building, broadcasting its own wireless network: let's call them Work 1 and Work 2.Is there any way for me to connect the Work 1 and Work 2 wireless networks, so that they appear to the end user as one contiguous network?
I have 2 internet services with separate ISPs. My local telephone exchange is somewhat dated so the maximum speed per ISP/connection is about 1 Gbps. I have streaming radio services, I do quite a bit of file downloading and there multiple devices currently trying to share a single connection. I haven't been able to utilise the second connection because my NAS and print serving is all configured on the first connection and therefore unavailable to users/services on the second connection.My goal is to utilise the available capacity of both connections but at the same time allowing all network resources (file and printer sharing, NAS drives, etc.) to be available jointly to all network clients.
My first router is a Netgear RangeMax ADSL modem/wireless router (DG834PN). This connects directly to one ISP and has the NAS and printers attached. The second router is a Netgear N600 wireless dual band router (WNDR3400) which attaches to a Linksys ADSL 2 Gateway with 4-port switch (AG241 v2) and then to the second ISP.As an aside, I also have a number of Devolo devices for utilising the electrical circuit for networking purposes. I have a dLAN 200 AVmini adapter connected to the RangeMax router with 2 further dLAN 200 AVmini adapters and a dLAN 200 AV wireless N adapter distributed through my house.
As the title states, I am want to set up a single ADSL connection, using 1 router across 6 apartments. The apartments are 2 floors and from the top they look like this The Router is on Apartment 1. Between apartment 1 and 2, 3 and 4, and 5 and 6 is a normal cement wall. Between 3 and 4 is Cement and stone, so are the outside walls of each house. I was thinking of doing it simple and using 3-4 range extenders such as the Linksys RE1000. From what i searched on the internet, and what the documentation states, the signal will get bottle-necked for the last house due to the RE1000 giving half of the bandwidth. Quote from Linksys FAQ: Quote: 7. Can I add more than one RE1000 to my existing wireless network? Yes. But since the RE1000 only gets half of the wireless signal from your main router or access point, adding multiple range extenders can provide you with even lower signal, thus, giving lesser bandwidth to your wireless computers or devices that you are going to connect to these additional extenders.So, what would be an optimal solution to this? Should I go ahead and install the RE1000's? Is there something better that i can do?
setting up a simple internet plan for a place, but a LAN center needs crazy fast internet, faster than most large enterprise class offices that take up an entire floor or two. Otherwise there is too much lag in games like first person shooters. We are expecting to have 60 computers, plus people bringing their own gaming rigs from home and laptops as well, xbox, ps3 and other consoles, all accessing the internet at the same time to varying degrees, with no room for lag. There is a LAN center in california that has 200 or more computers and they pay for 9 t3 lines, which is thousands and thousands of dollars per month. Plus the initial equipment to set that up from what I can find on cdw is many thousands of dollars also. Something like 10,000 for a router with 4 expansion bays, and 4000-6000 dollars for a t3 expansion card, bringing the total to around 22-28,000 for equipment to do just 4 t3's. Plus the monthly cost. Since we don't need all of the traffic to be secured like a high end business class line like a t3, I was considering what it would be like, and how one would set up, having multiple cable internet lines coming in. They make cable wic cards for cisco routers. 4, 50meg cable lines would give us 200 down and 40 up but I don't know how to make that work without having multiple public ip's. I was thinking that if I did have multiple public ip's on the network I could just divide the computers up so that they are in groups, using all of the public ip addresses for gateways, so that the load is split pretty evenly, but still, there should be a more seamless way to do this, I just don't know what it is. At the rate for business cable internet, 4 lines would probably only cost around 700 dollars a month, which is much better than probably 5 grand a month for several t3 lines.
I want to Single SSID in my network .I have 3 cisco 4410 WAP. ISP router Have the Wireless .How to get the single ssid in the network .same time i want to do configure in the isp router for wireless?
I have a standard home network consisting of internet access provided by my cable company which is then disseminated to a variety of wired and wireless devices via a router.
I would like to create a second wireless network that is separate from my current one. This new wireless network would have extra access controls including access restrictions to some web sites using both IP address restrictions and using the OpenDNS DNS servers.
The picture below illustrates the current configuration. The question is: how can I connect ROUTER B to the internet using my current equipment (without buying another IP address from the cable company)?
W MODEM --> ROUTER A --> ANTENNA <------> COMP 3 1 2 3 4 | | | | COMP 1 <---' | W | ?? <--> ROUTER B --> ANTENNA <---> COMP 4 COMP 2 <-----' 1 2 3 4
W = WAN port
So, in the above picture, COMP 4 is connected via wireless to this second network and cannot access anything on the first network and uses different different DNS servers.
In case it matters, ROUTER A is a Linksys WRT54GL while ROUTER B is a D-Link DI-624.
When I turned my computer on this morning, it had no internet access.
I haven't changed any settings - I think there was a Windows Update though.
Windows 8, Intel 82579V.
The DNS settings are correct, that is, unchanged and what we have always used.
I can access the network fine, browse shares, see the other machines etc. but the network icon in system tray says "No Internet access.".
I can ping the gateway.
All other computers on the network have Internet access.
The network cable works and provides internet access when plugged into a different computer.
I have tried disabling IPv6. I have tried disabling/enabling the network connection. I have restarted Windows multiple times. I have tried disabling Windows Firewall.
I am at a complete loss as to what to try next.
ipconfig /all dump follows:
Windows IP Configuration Host Name . . . . . . . . . . . . : cydonia Primary Dns Suffix . . . . . . . : Node Type . . . . . . . . . . . . : Hybrid
We have recently aquired a remote location which has a pre-existing flat network (172.16.X.X/16). Before we are able to convert them over to our new IP scheme, they have a need to have wireless connectivity on site. We have 4 1142's which I need to configure for them. I have experience configuring WLC's and autonomous AP's for networks with multiple vlans but have never configured AP's for a flat, single subnet network. I need to configure them for either guest access (internet only) or corporate access to network resources with radius authentication. Do I configure a native vlan as I would for a typical multi vlan network? Do I configure the switch port as an access port as opposed to a trunk beacause of the lack of layer 3? I basically need a sample configuration for this situation.
