1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

100mb or 1000mb router/switch for MRV?

Discussion in 'DIRECTV General Discussion' started by mrfatboy, Jun 15, 2010.

  1. bemenaker

    bemenaker AllStar

    58
    0
    Jan 6, 2008
    This is mostly true. A hub would actually follow the rules to the letter I stated before of total bandwidth/# of talkers. For high end equipment, like the stuff your office is paying over $1000 a switch for, they can handle 1GB per port speeds, and have the bandwidth on their (switch itself) internal backbone. On the sub $100 equipment you buy at Best Buy for home use, don't count on an 8 port Gb switch being able to handle routing 8 separate gigabit data streams and not losing speed. That is why Cisco still gets to charge $3000 for that kind of equipment. I normally simplify explaining it to people and use the hub rules so people have their expectations set more realistically. These low end switches fall somewhere in between those two data rate levels, and are an improvement for sure. Gigabit stuff is cheap now, and you will definitely benefit by making it your backbone. Do like in another post here, keep you current router and run one wire from it to your gigabit switch for your internet connectivity. This will just give you most stable network (speed wise) you can run for under $100.
     
  2. mrfatboy

    mrfatboy Godfather

    333
    0
    Jan 20, 2007
    Please correct me if I'm wrong here but it sounds like a Gigabit switch would NOT benefit me if I only have the HR23 and the HR24 hooked up to the WRT54GL and the ONLY network traffic would be between those two units, correct? I'm basing that on because both HR's have only 100T transfer rates.

    Of course, if I threw in some internet browsing, online gaming, internet radio, streaming to my htpc, etc at the same time I would be in trouble.

    I only ask this because I don't do any of that while I'm MRV'ing (no kids also) so it would be a waste for a gigabit switch (except for the having a gigabit connection between my two computers), correct?
     
  3. espaeth

    espaeth AllStar

    91
    5
    Oct 13, 2003
    Maybe. The LAN ports on the WRT54GL aren't a true switch. If you load custom firmware on the unit, you can actually address each port as a separate NIC and build a multi-WAN router out of the unit. This device acts sort of like a switch using a software bridging process to link the LAN ports together -- the kernel drivers are efficient so performance is mostly okay, but there are a few situations where it will not perform as well as having an actual switch to network your devices.
     
  4. mjwagner

    mjwagner Icon

    670
    34
    Oct 8, 2005
    Don't believe that is actually the case. Their are many sub $100 GB switches available that will support 8 simultaneous duplex Gb data streams. Just one example would be the 8 port D-Link DGS-2208 (currently around $50). It's switching fabric supports full 16Gbps Forwarding Capacity (2 x 8 x 1 Gbps). The reason organizations pay thousands of dollars for Cisco switches is due to the full manageability and other advanced features that they provide.
     
  5. mjwagner

    mjwagner Icon

    670
    34
    Oct 8, 2005
    At this point Gb switches are cheap enough that I personally would not bother buying any switch or router that does not support full Gb speeds. Yes, most current devices only have 100 Mb NICs but that will change over time.
     
  6. espaeth

    espaeth AllStar

    91
    5
    Oct 13, 2003
    Yep.

    We use Ixia traffic generators to evaluate our enterprise switch gear, and for grins we've taken some of the sub-$50 switches and put them through their paces. Really for everything other than many ports flooding a single destination port the cheap switches handle traffic better than the price would have you believe. Basic Ethernet switching ASICs are a commodity, so if you're just looking for Ethernet switching without extra features it is dirt cheap to produce those products.
     
  7. Lee L

    Lee L Hall Of Fame

    3,134
    0
    Aug 15, 2002
    I think also, the latest generation of consumer level GB switches were the first to be able to switch at full capacity, so until the last year or so, it was pretty rare at under the Cisco level pricing.
     
  8. HoTat2

    HoTat2 Hall Of Fame

    7,319
    185
    Nov 16, 2005
    Los...
    Wait, you mean the customary (usually 4) LAN ethernet ports on a router is not an integrated ethernet switch but actually a hub?

    Wow ... embarrassingly I didn't know that all this time and felt that the term "router" as a label for the usual wireless ones regularly purchased by consumers was really just short-hand for a combination ethernet switch, router, and WAP multifunction device.

    Therefore I will indeed move all my LAN connections ASAP to an external 8 port switch connected to my router then.

    Even though it is only an inexpensive 10/100 one by a company called "Intellinet."
     
  9. Bigg

    Bigg Godfather

    434
    23
    Feb 26, 2010
    That actually makes sense.

    For computers, a cheapo $11 ethernet switch is good enough, but for the DirecTV boxes, you'd probably want a better one, and at that point, you may as well go gigabit.

    Even if a switch didn't support full capacity switching, there is really no reason you'd need it. You would need a super fast server with a RAID array just to saturate 1gb, much less 16.

    That was just in reference to a WRT54G. Unless you have stability issues with the router, or speed issues, there's no rush to do so. It is switched, just in software, not hardware. It is not hubbed, as each port is a separate NIC.

    That may explain, however, why my WRT54Gv.1 is so slow, it's handling ethernet and wifi traffic on top of routing, all off of one processor. My WRT54GL is much faster, but it's not routing, and has less ethernet load on it.
     
  10. mrfatboy

    mrfatboy Godfather

    333
    0
    Jan 20, 2007
    I have DD-WRT v24-sp2 (10/10/09) (the latest) std on my wrt54GL currently. Since I have no other traffic going thru it except the two HRXX's it looks like I won't get really a benefit by upgrading to gigabit. But's it's nice to know that I can easily upgrade to a gigabit switch for $50 when my network needs require it.
     
  11. jacmyoung

    jacmyoung Hall Of Fame

    6,544
    0
    Sep 8, 2006
    I already have an 8-port switch in the media closet, connecting my four HDDVRs in their respective rooms using pre-wired CAT5s. However in one room I also have a PC piggybacked onto the HR21. Now I am in the process of replacing this HR21 with a new HR24, the PC will not be able to piggyback on the HR24.

    Can I just buy a cheap hub/switch, or what I call a “splitter” and use it between the wall plate and the HR24/PC? How about simply splitting the CAT5 in the wall and turn it into a two Ethernet ports at the wall plate? Will I still be able to do MRV for this DVR?
     
  12. espaeth

    espaeth AllStar

    91
    5
    Oct 13, 2003
    If you're doing gigabit between switches on each end you should be fine having the PC and HR24 on the other end. 100mbps would probably work, but there is a bigger potential for the PC to interfere with the MRV performance.

    You can either go with a separate cheap switch to hide behind your gear, or if you want to get fancy you can use something like the 3Com Intellijack product which integrates a switch into the wallplate: http://www.3com.com/products/en_US/detail.jsp?tab=features&pathtype=purchase&sku=WEBBNCNJ220SYS
     
  13. lugnutathome

    lugnutathome Hall Of Fame

    3,003
    108
    Apr 13, 2009
    Woodburn, OR
    Adding a "local" switch is no problem unless you have a lot of combined traffic down to the main switch back out to it. (a lot of traffic being passing back and forth on the same trunk to the backbone) A PC using the intertoobs is limited to the ISP bandwidth which isn't much in the overall scheme.

    I have a main 16 port backbone switch down at my head end (where the Sat, Terrestrial, Phone, and LAN networks distribution originates). In most of the rooms where I've got DTV DVR receivers I also have network AV receivers, at least one network connected BluRay device, etc. I have 5 port and 8 port switches for each of these locations...

    In my main home office I've 2 PC's and an HR22-100 and that is my only gigabit switch and that is for transferring files between the PCs. (that traffic remains on the local workgroup switch) As far as internet up down and WHDVR traffic a 10/100 works just fine.

    Once devices and their switching path are registered in your LAN the traffic does not need go out to the router, and the switches handle the distribution of packets via their internal addressing maps.

    Having multiple devices on a work group type switch attached to a single line off a backbone switch is just fine and in fact is just a scaled down version of many office network deployments.

    Don "no capes" Bolton

     
  14. jacmyoung

    jacmyoung Hall Of Fame

    6,544
    0
    Sep 8, 2006
    Thank you both.
     
  15. Bigg

    Bigg Godfather

    434
    23
    Feb 26, 2010
    The switch is the correct way, using the second port on a DVR uses up it's CPU cycles. As long as you're not transferring massive files from computer to computer while you're using the DVR for MRV, it should be fine. If you aren, just use all gigabit, and since the computer can't max that out, it will work well all around.
     

Share This Page