|
MrMoo posted:yay, Good luck. Post a trip report when you're done playing with the setup
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 02:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 18:23 |
|
|
Eero setup is really easy, follow the instructions on the app which is basically 1) plug in network cable, 2) plug in power, 3) wait for blue flashing light and tap next, rinse and repeat for all other devices. It's a bit cringing that Eero goes further than Apple on setup and you can only control via a smart phone app, no desktop app or web page. The app has really basic configuration options but appears sufficient for most needs. Interesting the device has two RJ45 jacks but both are multi-purpose, neither is dedicated as a WAN which is confusing if you want to plug in a switch.  What is nice is that I now get full WiFi bars all around the house, so mission accomplished. Each device has a page like this:  You configure the system as a whole for network settings:  Advance settings to play around with say Google DNS, etc. 
MrMoo fucked around with this message at 03:31 on Feb 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 03:24
|
|
|
My fibre is finally being delivered Friday next week (only 7+ weeks!) And I'm setting up my EdgerouterX. Is it worth having another subnet? Should I have my WiFi on a separate subnet than my computer? Seems like it would be much easier to have it all on one subnet just not sure if this is best practise.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 04:15
|
|
|
I'd like an answer to that as well. I just threw all three LAN ports + the WiFI port on the same switch. Works fine but could maybe have been done more elegantly?
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 05:45
|
|
|
Unless you have a security need or your house is actually a place where a hundred plus people are all sharing the network, you don't need to partition your networks.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 06:01
|
|
|
Red_Fred posted:My fibre is finally being delivered Friday next week (only 7+ weeks!) And I'm setting up my EdgerouterX. Is it worth having another subnet? Should I have my WiFi on a separate subnet than my computer? Seems like it would be much easier to have it all on one subnet just not sure if this is best practise. I wouldn't bother. Vlan'ing things off into their own subnets is something you only do for security/compliance or scalability reasons. I seriously doubt you are processing credit card transactions at home or plugging more than a hundred machines into your home LAN. The only case I can see for running a second vlan and associated wifi SSID at home is for a guest network where you have random people wanting to borrow your wifi all the time and you don't want them on the same segment as your stuff. But even this is an edge case.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 17:26
|
|
|
I have a few network segments at home. Normal (my poo poo, wired and wireless), guest, lab and DMZ.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 17:44
|
|
|
Antillie posted:I wouldn't bother. Vlan'ing things off into their own subnets is something you only do for security/compliance or scalability reasons. I seriously doubt you are processing credit card transactions at home or plugging more than a hundred machines into your home LAN. It's like "Should I get a managed switch?" where if you have to ask, the answer is almost invariably "No."
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 17:54
|
|
|
MrMoo posted:yay, Nice! Really curious to see how the speed will be on one of the wirelessly bridged eeros; I'm more than certain my spouse would like for me to get rid of the 50' Ethernet cable I've got strung to a router I have set up as an AP at the moment.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 19:07
|
|
|
I'm about to sign up for time warners 200/20 Mbps service. The last couple pages seem to point to the SURFboard SB6183 and TP-Link Archer C7. I'll be set, right?
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 19:11
|
|
|
Inspector_666 posted:It's like "Should I get a managed switch?" where if you have to ask, the answer is almost invariably "No." Yeah pretty much. If you need these things, you will already know that you need them because your PCI/HIPAA compliance auditor told you or the network engineer handling the project told you.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 19:20
|
|
|
DarkSun6890 posted:I'm about to sign up for time warners 200/20 Mbps service. The last couple pages seem to point to the SURFboard SB6183 and TP-Link Archer C7. I'll be set, right? Yep. The Archer C5 and C9 are also options if you want a lower or higher level of price and performance respectively on your wifi. If you have a lot of Apple devices then the Airport Extreme or Time Capsule are also good options as Apple stuff really really likes other Apple stuff. ASUS and Netgear make some nice routers as well but they cost more than the Archer stuff for little gain. The EdgerouterX and UAP-AC-Lite are the go to options for power users, people who want business grade reliability, or need advanced features like vlans and such, or people who want their router and wifi to be separate devices. The Edgerouter Lite and UAP-AC-Pro are similar to but faster than their X and Lite siblings with the Edgerouter Lite able to handle gigabit speeds while the EdgerouterX caps out somewhere around 750mbps for LAN<->WAN performance. However the EdgerouterX also acts as wire speed switch whereas the Edgerouter Lite needs to be paired with a separate switch if you want to connect more than one wired device to it on the LAN. Antillie fucked around with this message at 19:36 on Feb 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 19:25
|
|
|
Antillie posted:Yeah pretty much. If you need these things, you will already know that you need them because your PCI/HIPAA compliance auditor told you or the network engineer handling the project told you. Not at all, people do have uses for managed switches and good firewalls at home. All depends on what you do (aka how nerdy you are) with your home network.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 20:28
|
|
|
Antillie posted:The Edgerouter Lite and UAP-AC-Pro are similar to but faster than their X and Lite siblings with the Edgerouter Lite able to handle gigabit speeds while the EdgerouterX caps out somewhere around 750mbps for LAN<->WAN performance. However the EdgerouterX also acts as wire speed switch whereas the Edgerouter Lite needs to be paired with a separate switch if you want to connect more than one wired device to it on the LAN. ER-Lite does 1 million packets per second, so that's wire-rate gigabit. The ER-X only does 130k pps so you're looking at a range more like 300mbps with normal packet load and 1gbps when using large packet transfers WAN-to-LAN. But like you said, the ports on the ER-Lite are individually discreet ports, whereas the ER-X is one big switch chip across 5 ports, which you can split apart in software. Meaning with the ER-X you get wire-speed switching but CPU-bound routing (also no hardware acceleration) but on the ER-Lite you get wire-speed routing, but CPU-bound switching if you bridge ports together.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 20:32
|
|
|
Thanks.! That's great info. I went with what I posted. I figure midrange is perfect for my needs.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 20:37
|
|
|
mediaphage posted:Nice! Really curious to see how the speed will be on one of the wirelessly bridged eeros; I'm more than certain my spouse would like for me to get rid of the 50' Ethernet cable I've got strung to a router I have set up as an AP at the moment. Haven't tested that bit yet, I did receive the following email this morning: 
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 21:16
|
|
|
CrazyLittle posted:ER-Lite does 1 million packets per second, so that's wire-rate gigabit. The ER-X only does 130k pps so you're looking at a range more like 300mbps with normal packet load and 1gbps when using large packet transfers WAN-to-LAN. But like you said, the ports on the ER-Lite are individually discreet ports, whereas the ER-X is one big switch chip across 5 ports, which you can split apart in software. Meaning with the ER-X you get wire-speed switching but CPU-bound routing (also no hardware acceleration) but on the ER-Lite you get wire-speed routing, but CPU-bound switching if you bridge ports together. After a bit more poking around I think I would put the EdgerouterX at about 500mbps for real world WAN<->LAN throughput. But you are right. The actual throughput will vary by a lot depending on packet size and traffic patterns. I have seen reports of ~750mbps though. That's the problem with pps ratings. They don't translate well to actual throughput in home use cases. For anyone with a 300mbps+ internet connection I think the Edgerouter Lite makes more sense. But for most people the EdgerouterX is plenty.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 23:18
|
|
|
Go get a WiFi network scanner like inSSIDer and do a wifi frequency map. Let's see if eero's hiding some bad habits behind the scenes.Antillie posted:After a bit more poking around I think I would put the EdgerouterX at about 500mbps for real world WAN<->LAN throughput. But you are right. The actual throughput will vary by a lot depending on packet size and traffic patterns. I have seen reports of ~750mbps though. That's the problem with pps ratings. They don't translate well to actual throughput in home use cases. For anyone with a 300mbps+ internet connection I think the Edgerouter Lite makes more sense. But for most people the EdgerouterX is plenty. I'll toss one on my bench later and do some iperf tests. In my experience the vast majority of internet traffic is small packets. For example here's the packet size distribution for a medium sized biz office: 
CrazyLittle fucked around with this message at 23:21 on Feb 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 23:18
|
|
|
Moey posted:Not at all, people do have uses for managed switches and good firewalls at home. All depends on what you do (aka how nerdy you are) with your home network. Well sure, I have managed switches at home myself. But I wouldn't say that I need them. I just like cool toys because I am a total networking nerd. But I still feel that most people have no real use for a managed switch at home. I certainly wouldn't recommend one for my parents or my non network nerd friends.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 23:24
|
|
|
Antillie posted:Well sure, I have managed switches at home myself. But I wouldn't say that I need them. I just like cool toys because I am a total networking nerd. But I still feel that most people have no real use for a managed switch at home. I certainly wouldn't recommend one for my parents or my non network nerd friends. Agreed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 23:32
|
|
|
CrazyLittle posted:Go get a WiFi network scanner like inSSIDer and do a wifi frequency map. Let's see if eero's hiding some bad habits behind the scenes. I am very curious to see what the results are. A quick chart in Excel shows that while small packets are a large group in your traffic stats, the large packets actually account for more of the traffic. (48% to 38%) So I imagine that the results would fall somewhere around 600mbps if you perfectly mirrored that office in your test. 
Antillie fucked around with this message at 00:00 on Feb 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 23:39
|
|
|
Antillie posted:Yeah pretty much. If you need these things, you will already know that you need them because your PCI/HIPAA compliance auditor told you or the network engineer handling the project told you. I figured that was the case just wanted to check. I was talking about subnets actually, not vlans but it's a similar concept I guess.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 23:46
|
|
|
Red_Fred posted:I figured that was the case just wanted to check. I was talking about subnets actually, not vlans but it's a similar concept I guess. Subnets are almost always associated with separate vlans on a 1 to 1 basis. So engineers like myself tend to interchange the two terms a bit when talking about this stuff, even though they are different things. Sorry I didn't clarify that better.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 23:58
|
|
|
Antillie posted:Subnets are almost always associated with separate vlans on a 1 to 1 basis. So engineers like myself tend to interchange the two terms a bit when talking about this stuff, even though they are different things. Sorry I didn't clarify that better. Link subnets with access ports to different vlans on each switch. Everyone will love you.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2016 00:00
|
|
|
Does anyone have experience with Ubiquiti APs and vlans? Based on this document it seems like it should be fairly straightforward (I'd be working with a single-switch configuration but want to set up separate vlans for home, guest, and and lab): https://help.ubnt.com/hc/en-us/articles/205146150-UniFi-VLAN-switch-configuration
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2016 00:07
|
|
|
GobiasIndustries posted:Does anyone have experience with Ubiquiti APs and vlans? Based on this document it seems like it should be fairly straightforward (I'd be working with a single-switch configuration but want to set up separate vlans for home, guest, and and lab): https://help.ubnt.com/hc/en-us/articles/205146150-UniFi-VLAN-switch-configuration Yes, it's that straight forward. The APs tag traffic based on SSID, and pass them along to your vlan capable switch. Make sure you have the VLANs and related port config setup on the switch and router as well.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2016 00:13
|
|
|
GobiasIndustries posted:Does anyone have experience with Ubiquiti APs and vlans? Based on this document it seems like it should be fairly straightforward (I'd be working with a single-switch configuration but want to set up separate vlans for home, guest, and and lab): https://help.ubnt.com/hc/en-us/articles/205146150-UniFi-VLAN-switch-configuration I have two vlans going to my Unifi APs, one for my LAN and one for a guest SSID. Vlans 100 and 50 in my case. On the switch vlan 100 is native and vlan 50 is tagged. In the Unifi controller one SSID has the vlan box checked with "50" entered as the Vlan ID. The other SSID does not have the vlan box checked. Works fine. Although I am using Ubiquiti's 8 port Tough Switches I don't see why it wouldn't work with a Cisco Catalyst or whatever as it plays nicely with vlan tagging on my pfSense router as well. Antillie fucked around with this message at 00:18 on Feb 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2016 00:14
|
|
|
CrazyLittle posted:Go get a WiFi network scanner like inSSIDer and do a wifi frequency map. Let's see if eero's hiding some bad habits behind the scenes. Here is iStumbler: 
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2016 00:17
|
|
|
Huh. That's odd. Why the hell would you put all the units on the same WiFi channel? That would just make the snr poop itself due to same-channel interference.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2016 00:28
|
|
|
CrazyLittle posted:Yes, it's that straight forward. The APs tag traffic based on SSID, and pass them along to your vlan capable switch. Make sure you have the VLANs and related port config setup on the switch and router as well. Antillie posted:I have two vlans going to my Unifi APs, one for my LAN and one for a guest SSID. Vlans 100 and 50 in my case. On the switch vlan 100 is native and vlan 50 is tagged. In the Unifi controller one SSID has the vlan box checked with "50" entered as the Vlan ID. The other SSID does not have the vlan box checked. Works fine. Although I am using Ubiquiti's 8 port Tough Switches I don't see why it wouldn't work with a Cisco Catalyst or whatever as it plays nicely with vlan tagging on my pfSense router as well. Perfect, thanks! I had a very derp moment where I couldn't for the life of me remember how vlans worked w/ APs and SSIDs. I'm prepping to upgrade my home for a fiber connection and will be picking up an ERL, AC-Lite AP and a TP-Link managed switch to handle everything.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2016 00:39
|
|
|
CrazyLittle posted:Huh. That's odd. Why the hell would you put all the units on the same WiFi channel? That would just make the snr poop itself due to same-channel interference. I'm having trouble finding the start of this conversation, but if he is using something like Ubiquiti's Zero Handoff, you need them on the same channel.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2016 00:43
|
|
|
What are the advantages of the Archer C7 over the C5? None of the devices would be more than 20 feet away from the router, but it is a dense area, there are probably 8-10 visible wifi signals if that matters.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2016 01:07
|
|
|
gman14msu posted:What are the advantages of the Archer C7 over the C5? None of the devices would be more than 20 feet away from the router, but it is a dense area, there are probably 8-10 visible wifi signals if that matters. More raw wifi speed. That's about it really.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2016 01:11
|
|
|
Is there any way for me to configure this Netgear WNR2000v5 I have sitting here as a wireless bridge? The PS4's internal antenna is not good, so I'd like to plug it into the WNR2000v5 and then have that tie into my existing wifi network. Right now I have the PS4 connected via my PC and Internet Connection Sharing, and it is, ahem...not great.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2016 01:26
|
|
|
Internet Explorer posted:I'm having trouble finding the start of this conversation, but if he is using something like Ubiquiti's Zero Handoff, you need them on the same channel. Sorry, I didn't fully quote everything. Moo got a set of the new Eero AP/routers which are supposed to work together to improve your client reception speeds. Normally doing the whole zero-handoff thing just wrecks everything because the APs fight each other more than they deliver a clean signal to your devices. I'm curious to see how/why eero would be exempt from this. GobiasIndustries posted:Perfect, thanks! I had a very derp moment where I couldn't for the life of me remember how vlans worked w/ APs and SSIDs. I'm prepping to upgrade my home for a fiber connection and will be picking up an ERL, AC-Lite AP and a TP-Link managed switch to handle everything. IIRC technically WiFi protocols don't actually support VLAN tags. It's up to the AP devices to sort and tag the traffic appropriately
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2016 05:17
|
|
|
Deviant posted:Is there any way for me to configure this Netgear WNR2000v5 I have sitting here as a wireless bridge? The PS4's internal antenna is not good, so I'd like to plug it into the WNR2000v5 and then have that tie into my existing wifi network. Google search looks to me like you're out of luck on that model. The stock device doesn't seem to support setting it in wifi client mode, and there's no dd-wrt nor open-wrt support for it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2016 05:44
|
|
|
I have got fed up of my powerline adapters not being able to deliver my full broadband speed around my house, so I've decided I'm going to run ethernet between the cable modem (ground floor, front left corner of the house) to my PC (two floors up, back right corner of the house). Am I right in thinking that all I really need is: A reel of ethernet cable, either CAT5e or CAT6 Two face plates/back boxes A punchdown tool A drill Some cable tacks Maybe some trunking if I'm feeling fancy
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2016 14:59
|
|
|
Fil5000 posted:I have got fed up of my powerline adapters not being able to deliver my full broadband speed around my house, so I've decided I'm going to run ethernet between the cable modem (ground floor, front left corner of the house) to my PC (two floors up, back right corner of the house). Am I right in thinking that all I really need is: Yeah, pretty much, as long as everything is easy to get to behind the walls. If you're buying new stuff it's not a bad idea to get cat6. It can be harder to put ends on cat6 as patch cable but punching it down is about the same as cat5e. If you have to pull the cable through some distance a small fish tape isn't a bad idea for fishing the cable from point to point, as well as some string and tape to adhere the string or cable to the fish tape. It's also a good idea to plan out the pull and whether to start it at the top or bottom. If you're feeding it from a low point to a high point it's often good to start at the high point because pushing a cable up inside a wall vs. gravity makes it flop over (hence fish tape which is fairly rigid). If you can get access to the entirety of the vertical run then you could do that, but otherwise I'd start at the top. Also as with any cable run, consider if you'd like to run two at the same time and leave some slack coiled up near the ends of the run in case you have to change the ends later.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2016 16:42
|
|
|
I'm trying to replace my Verizion Actiontec router with a TP-LINK Archer C7 + TP-LINK DOCSIS 3.0 Cable Modem, but it isn't connecting to the internet. I tried taking the coax cable to the modem, which connects to the router, which connects to computer, then following the quick start instructions. I can connect to the router and the modem's gui but not the internet. the little light on the modem for internet is off. I've released the DHCP leas on the old router. I contacted Verizon because the modem claims it needs to be activated and they claim it's not an issue on their side. Switching the wires back to the old router still works. Am I missing something dumb?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2016 17:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 18:23 |
|
|
Rexxed posted:Yeah, pretty much, as long as everything is easy to get to behind the walls. If you're buying new stuff it's not a bad idea to get cat6. It can be harder to put ends on cat6 as patch cable but punching it down is about the same as cat5e. If you have to pull the cable through some distance a small fish tape isn't a bad idea for fishing the cable from point to point, as well as some string and tape to adhere the string or cable to the fish tape. Cheers - it's an old house (built in the 1930s) with solid brick walls everywhere except the converted loft, so I'm not going to be able to conceal the cable in the walls very much. It's going to be going over doorways and along skirting boards with the occasional hole in a wall. That being the case I'm probably just going to run a single cable as it'll be less noticeable than running multiple ones. As I'm basically just running it from my cable modem to the switch in my office space is there any great advantage to running more than one cable? I'll shoot for going top to bottom, thanks for that advice. My instinct was to start at the cable modem and run from there to the PC but letting gravity do the work sounds smarter.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2016 17:50
|
|