|
Ninja Rope posted:Link aggregation/LACP won't improve the performance of one client to one server communication (unless a layer 4 hashing algorithm is used, available on some switches, and multiple connections are created between the client and server). It's useful for one-to-many, many-to-many, and redundant connections, though. So if I did need those things 10G is the only option then?
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2011 19:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 21:54 |
|
|
Before you go buying any card, you need to make sure your switch/router can support that aggregation protocol the card uses. You may be better off doing load balancing. You could run a ftp/file sharing service on one card, then streaming video/music on another. Keep in mind the system IO will still limit how fast you can push data.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2011 19:44
|
|
|
Shaocaholica posted:So link aggregation with 1G works up to 4? Can you get 4x1G NICs cheaper than 10G NICs? Link aggregation as a generic concept goes more than 4 links - I know for a fact that on a lot of Cisco platforms you can do up to 8-link Etherchannel/bundling. At a certain point, though, you start to go to more trouble/pay more money to get a lot of 1G ports and run a bunch of cables in between than to just do one 10G link. As Ninja Rope mentioned, most applications do a per-flow hashing algorithm to load balance across links, often based on IP/MAC addresses. If you have one host communicating with one other host, this kind of thing will generally hash to the same link for every frame and not use the others at all. Some load-balancing works per-packet/frame, which is a lot better for a limited number of flows. If you can hash on TCP/UDP port number or other layer 4+ info then that will also help assuming your traffic has some diversity there, but - really, we're getting pretty deep into platform/application limitations here. The 4 figure was just an arbitrary design ideal off the top of my head, not a hard rule; the main point is that even if you can stick 10x1G NICs in your server for cheaper than a 10G, that doesn't necessarily mean it's better. EDIT: Since this is for *home* networking though, I'd say you should probably try to aggregate in another link or two if necessary before shelling out a pile of cash for 10G gear. Eletriarnation fucked around with this message at 21:59 on Nov 21, 2011 |
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2011 21:56
|
|
|
Shaocaholica posted:So if I did need those things 10G is the only option then? Unless you can make your app use multiple connections at the same time, yes, 10G ethernet is your only option (without getting into infiniband, fibre channel, or whatever; I don't know what you're trying to do). You already mentioned "a few machines", so maybe LACP will work for you (one to many!).
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2011 21:57
|
|
|
LACP may provide me with some options for changing my CFD modelling configuration. I've managed to push through memory bandwidth issues and the only problem I have is storage. Being able to write to network storage at faster than gigabit would be useful. What would be the best resource to use to learn how to configure LACP effectively?
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2011 22:12
|
|
|
How about thunderbolt? If your other machine is near you, that's a 10gbit connection no? I guess there probably isn't software to do this yet. You'd have to wait until 2012 before the hardware is available for non macs (or buy new macs) though. Hopefully their fiber optic cables actually come out as they are promising 100meter runs. Is this seen as ANY kind of replacement to ethernet/TCP in the future?
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2011 22:23
|
|
|
IF you're just going one client one server then you can hook them together with crossover cables. No port trunking switch needed! You don't need specially rewritten software or anything if you use something like a bonding driver.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2011 22:35
|
|
|
I would be looking to go many servers writing to a storage server. The ability for the servers to communicate at higher than gigabit would allow more flexibility in scaling.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2011 22:38
|
|
|
Devian666 posted:I would be looking to go many servers writing to a storage server. The ability for the servers to communicate at higher than gigabit would allow more flexibility in scaling. What are you running in that box that would saturate a gigabit link?
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2011 22:52
|
|
|
TECHNICAL Thug posted:What are you running in that box that would saturate a gigabit link? I run fire simulations which are CFD based. The models produce a large amount of output data in bursts which can hold up processing. When I scale up I could saturate two gigabit links.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2011 22:58
|
|
|
Jago posted:How about thunderbolt? If your other machine is near you, that's a 10gbit connection no? I guess there probably isn't software to do this yet. You'd have to wait until 2012 before the hardware is available for non macs (or buy new macs) though. Hopefully their fiber optic cables actually come out as they are promising 100meter runs. Can you network with TB? Switching?
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2011 23:21
|
|
|
As far as I know there is no switching capability for Thunderbolt.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2011 23:49
|
|
|
Longinus00 posted:IF you're just going one client one server then you can hook them together with crossover cables. No port trunking switch needed! You don't need specially rewritten software or anything if you use something like a bonding driver. You don't need crossover cables any more, gige mandates auto-detection. If you're going device to device without a switch involved, the Linux bonding driver includes the "balance-rr" mode which will aggregate bandwidth linearly. Adding a switch means you go back to my earlier caveats regarding hashing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2011 00:27
|
|
|
Just thought I'd jump in here and post something that I learned the hard way Picked up a Linksys E3200 about a week ago as it was available locally and appeared to be a minor spec bump up from the E3000 (which is sold on newegg still) What I didn't realize at the time is that the driver source for the 5ghz antenna has not been released, and thus does not work in dd-wrt So I had to go back to stock firmware to get dual-band (the main reason I picked it up to replace my old 54GL), but it's stability has been poo poo I'm going to try and return it and swap it for something else that truly supports dual band AND dd-wrt (or tomato) tl;dr - avoid the E3200 if you want dual-band and non-stock firmware. It's listed as "compatible" on the dd-wrt page but I had to dig into the forums to discover that the 5ghz antenna isn't
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2011 17:48
|
|
|
After reading this thread, I've come down to the WNDR 3700 and the WNDR 4000. Think it's worth the extra $30 for the 4000? Anyone familiar with how the claims re: extra range and extra speed stack up in practice? fake edit: Also thinking about the ASUS RT.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2011 04:35
|
|
|
Erdricks posted:After reading this thread, I've come down to the WNDR 3700 and the WNDR 4000. For best performance on a 3700 check that it's a 3700v2. I'm skeptical about any extra range but the 4000 has better wan to lan throughput and possibly better wireless speed (it does have a higher peak speed if you have anything that supports it). I'm pretty happy with my 3700 but extra money where it may not make a difference to you typically isn't worth it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2011 04:39
|
|
|
Devian666 posted:For best performance on a 3700 check that it's a 3700v2. I'm skeptical about any extra range but the 4000 has better wan to lan throughput and possibly better wireless speed (it does have a higher peak speed if you have anything that supports it). Thanks for the tip. This is the 3700 and this is the 4000 Am I correct that the 3700 is v1, so should I go for the 4000?
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2011 04:44
|
|
|
Looks like it might be a v1 but that only makes a 10% difference in performance from the v2. Not a big issue. Up to you if you want to spend the extra $30. If it doesn't make any difference to your finances just get the 4000.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2011 07:38
|
|
|
I returned my E3200 last night and picked up a 3700v2 in it's place. Haven't had a chance to set it up yet though
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2011 17:18
|
|
|
Whats with all these new routers not having external antennas? Are aftermarket high gain antennas a thing of the past?
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2011 22:12
|
|
|
Shaocaholica posted:Whats with all these new routers not having external antennas? Are aftermarket high gain antennas a thing of the past? I dunno, I can still see my network farther away from my home than I'm super comfy with frankly and it's all internal.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2011 22:31
|
|
|
Shaocaholica posted:Whats with all these new routers not having external antennas? Are aftermarket high gain antennas a thing of the past? I get the impression that the FCC might be behind that. I wouldn't be surprised if they're trying to control people adding after market antennas to reduce interference.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2011 00:09
|
|
|
Shaocaholica posted:Whats with all these new routers not having external antennas? Are aftermarket high gain antennas a thing of the past? I imagine it's cheaper to build without using external antennas.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2011 01:06
|
|
|
CuddleChunks posted:I imagine it's cheaper to build without using external antennas. Also, modern chip antennas work pretty well.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2011 02:04
|
|
|
Is the ASUS RT-N16 still a good go-to router, or has something better come along in its price range since the OP? (It's now $65 in canada with a MIR, $49 in the US, on newegg). The most traffic I will really give my home network is streaming HD content to my TV while my computer is downloading in the background (5mbit connection that maxes around 500k/sec, nothing crazy) in the background. The connection to the TV will probably be wired, but the content may be coming wireless from my PC to the router. Would dual-band be better for that?
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2011 14:22
|
|
|
If I set the Linksys E3000 up as a repeater, can I also use the ethernet ports to connect to the the original router? Otherwise, what's the best setup for giving both wired and wireless access to an area where one side is getting wireless signal?
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2011 17:11
|
|
|
I could use some tips/assistance. (wall o' text pending) I have an old WRT54G (v4 I think) running tomato 1.28 on my home network. I haven't done much customization/tweaking of the configuration, so it's a pretty standard configuration. I'd like to think it's pretty typical medium level usage (no torrenting, some xbox, and a low/moderate amount of streaming - all connections are wireless). What I'm seeing is an occasional drop out of my connection. I've traced it to the router a few ways - if the # of devices drops, it usually clears up. A few days ago I finally had the bright idea of checking the logs. Here's an excerpt from earlier this morning: code:Any help appreciated.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2011 17:30
|
|
|
I have a Netgear WNDR3700v1 running DD-WRT (16754). My setup is desktop on LAN port 1 and wireless for all other devices. A couple of days ago, I apparently had a power surge come through my cable lines. It took out my cable box, modem, and the WAN port on my router. I have been trying to find a way to convert one of my existing LAN ports into a WAN port but have been unsuccessful so far. The best info I have found yet is coming from this link in the DD-WRT wiki. http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/Switched_Ports I have tried to convert LAN port 4 into a WAN port using 2 different configurations as per the wiki. WAN on vlan1 and WAN on vlan2 with no luck. Both will let me access the internet through my router, but it is assigning the ISP provided ip address to my desktop and I cannot access the router after making these changes. Can anyone explain where I am going wrong and/or point me in another direction? I would prefer to sacrifice a LAN port to get this back up and running rather than buying a whole new router if possible. If this should be over in HoTS let me know and I will repost there. Well, a bit more reading and I may have found my problem. Looks like DD-WRT will not support port based vlans on an Atheros router. http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/VLAN_Support Anyone have any other ideas how this might be done, or am I out of luck? The_Mule fucked around with this message at 18:45 on Nov 24, 2011 |
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2011 17:36
|
|
|
alanthecat posted:If I set the Linksys E3000 up as a repeater, can I also use the ethernet ports to connect to the the original router? So you want to use it as an access point? Either way, DD WRT can run both of these setups. I currently have an E3000 hard wired via its LAN port to my router. Just remember not to use the WAN port when setting it up if you want it to be in the same subnet/ip range as your existing network.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2011 18:03
|
|
|
With real world speeds, assuming I have an N router 20ft away from an N laptop with line of sight, can I safely stream a 90minute 10GB HD movie? That's roughly 1GB every 10min.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2011 18:26
|
|
|
Shaocaholica posted:With real world speeds, assuming I have an N router 20ft away from an N laptop with line of sight, can I safely stream a 90minute 10GB HD movie? That's roughly 1GB every 10min. I found an article awhile back of someone who tested this, with a 450Mbps router he streamed 1080p video but there was jittering and such involved, so technically it can be done but you'll need to do some buffering. Guitarchitect posted:Is the ASUS RT-N16 still a good go-to router, or has something better come along in its price range since the OP? (It's now $65 in canada with a MIR, $49 in the US, on newegg). The most traffic I will really give my home network is streaming HD content to my TV while my computer is downloading in the background (5mbit connection that maxes around 500k/sec, nothing crazy) in the background. The connection to the TV will probably be wired, but the content may be coming wireless from my PC to the router. Would dual-band be better for that? I was just looking at this router, and for me the deal breaker is it's not dual-band. I have really band wireless saturation in my area which makes the connection super flaky if I'm not in the same room. I dug around and found the Linksys E3000 to be about the same price as the deal on Newegg so I'll probably get that instead. Ashex fucked around with this message at 20:09 on Nov 24, 2011 |
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2011 20:01
|
|
|
Ashex posted:I was just looking at this router, and for me the deal breaker is it's not dual-band. I have really band wireless saturation in my area which makes the connection super flaky if I'm not in the same room. I dug around and found the Linksys E3000 to be about the same price as the deal on Newegg so I'll probably get that instead. Interesting - the refurbished ones on Newegg are the same price as the brand new ones on Amazon.com. But amazon.com won't ship it to canada and the amazon.ca ones are $240  any other good equivalents?? and just out of curiosity - why was the dual-band a dealbreaker for you? Is it a "must" if you're downloading + streaming simultaneously?
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2011 20:21
|
|
|
alanthecat posted:If I set the Linksys E3000 up as a repeater, can I also use the ethernet ports to connect to the the original router? elite_garbage_man posted:So you want to use it as an access point? Either way, DD WRT can run both of these setups. I currently have an E3000 hard wired via its LAN port to my router. Just remember not to use the WAN port when setting it up if you want it to be in the same subnet/ip range as your existing network. No, sorry, I wrote that question poorly. I want a wireless bridge that is also a repeater, I think. And it would be great if I could give it a different SSID than the source AP. That possible?
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2011 20:26
|
|
|
Refurb D-Link 601 for $13 + $5 SH on 1SaleADay today (expires midnight EST) http://1saleaday.com/wireless/
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2011 20:37
|
|
|
vanilla slimfast posted:I returned my E3200 last night and picked up a 3700v2 in it's place. Haven't had a chance to set it up yet though Trip report: Took a couple of tries to get DD-WRT flashed onto it but once I did, it's been working great so far. Our 2.4ghz spectrum in our condo is pretty crowded but 5ghz is relatively empty which was the motivation for getting a dual band router. Rough speed tests from my MBP, same room, 512mb file Wired gigabit: 422mbit write/323mbit read Wireless-N: 82mbit write/45mbit read Not bad, the router itself is reporting my laptop is on at 150mbit on the 5ghz antenna.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2011 21:55
|
|
|
Those throughput figures are reasonably consistent with what is listed on smallnetbuilder, which is a positive result.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2011 23:05
|
|
|
alanthecat posted:No, sorry, I wrote that question poorly. I want a wireless bridge that is also a repeater, I think. And it would be great if I could give it a different SSID than the source AP. That possible? Give this a look: http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/Repeater_Bridge
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2011 02:12
|
|
|
Late remark: Crisis averted, DD-WRT saved my router after the stock firmware "died"  Is there an ISP thread though? Because the problem's definitely not from the router or the modem itself anymore. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2011 09:24
|
|
|
I have a question. My neighbor asked to borrow my wifi, to send mail and do online banking. And he would comp me half of my internet costs. My only concern is if he starts downloading illegal stuff like child porn it will look like I'm doing it, is there any way for me to see what's he is actually doing? I'm not talking about looking at the content of his mails here, just a way to see if he starts downloading huge amounts of data. I have a Linksys Wireless-G doing my wifi.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2011 10:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 21:54 |
|
zalderach posted:I have a question. Moey posted:I can't find the old post your spectrum thread, so I figure this is my next best bet. Just moved into a new place recently and am going to get my network up and running shortly (internet coming tomorrow, probably am going to do a few drops from the attic, along with cable (this place was wired by an rear end in a top hat). I decided to take a peek at whats going on in the airwaves...
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2011 13:13
|
|
