Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years.

Thanks,

CNET Support

General discussion

Hub, switch or router

May 9, 2005 5:21AM PDT

I must say i,m new to the world of networking.I've got three PC's running XP and one that i've just built which i hope to install Windows Server 2003 and it will connect to the internet using a BT ADSL USB Modem.I'm planning to set up a client server network to practice for MCSE as i'm planning to enrol on it soon.My problem is i dont know what's best to use(Hub,switch or router) so that i can controll the three PC's from the server and also controll their printer & internet connection through the Server.i'll be gratefull if anyone could help. Also can i use the same mordem that i was using before setting up the network(BT ADSL USB voyager modem).

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -
Since most consumer oriented routers....
May 9, 2005 5:25AM PDT

incorporate the functions of the other two, plus adds NAT/DHCP capabilities, I would opt for that.

- Collapse -
HUBs are from last century. Cheap, most are free.
May 9, 2005 5:32AM PDT

Switches are nice for a LAN.

And if you want to share your internet, you get the router.

Bob

- Collapse -
Bob and Michael...
May 9, 2005 6:15AM PDT

I agree that hubs are obolete and worth what you pay (often nothing, as you point out...). The OP mentioned setting up his new box with Server 2003 to gain practical experience for training and certification. As such, would there be any value to installing a switch rather than a router, and two NICs in the Server'03 box, one for the cable modem to the internet and the other to the switch for the clients. Then use Server for managing the client connectivity to the internet and each other? I realize that's the hardest possible way to do things, but that's what he is trying to do - learn all the hard ways at home where it doesn't matter so much before inflicting any more misery on the corporate users Wink

dw

- Collapse -
Yes. A hub would be the lesson why they are no more.
May 9, 2005 6:53AM PDT

But let's get real here. The most common setup is some DSL/CABLE MODEM Router setup.

They should have and learn what 90% of the people use.

Bob

- Collapse -
agree with bob
May 9, 2005 10:13AM PDT

yea, what's the good to have the MCSE without knowing how the real world function. I suggest to get a switch and a router so he can try different way to connect and screw things up and learn from there. if you can pick up a hub for free, i'll say why not, he got nothing to loss.

Albert (MCSE)

- Collapse -
contrarian advice
May 13, 2005 12:34AM PDT

Like others, I normally advocate switches over hubs; and yes, most routers do come with multi-port (typically 4) switches. HOWEVER, it is important to understand some of the pros & cons before deciding what is best for YOUR network.

To begin with, let's assume we are talking about 'unmanaged' switches and hubs (the kind most often found in very small networks). For our discussion purposes, 'unmanaged' means you can't change how the device operates and you reset it by doing a power cycle.

First, if you have the typical, single, dynamic IP address from your DSL provider, a router with NAT is essential to share your Internet connection among your network devices. Make sure you select a router that handles PPoE connections internally, then tell your DSL modem to act as a bridge, letting your router take care of login chores.

As noted, most routers come with 4-port switches built-in. This may or may not be enough ports for your needs. If not, you will need to use one port on the router's switch to install either another switch or a hub.

Which to choose?

Hubs work by broadcasting network traffic simultaneously to all devices, just like an old-fashioned party-line telephone system. All devices must continually listen for 'their' messages. And if more than one device tries to use the network at the same time, collisions occur and each device must re-send after waiting a random period of time. This can dramatically slow a network. To be honest, on the type of network you propose, collisions shouldn't be an issue. Hubs are also half duplex, meaning they can send or receive, but not both simultaneously.

Switches on the other hand dedicate each port to a single device, store incoming data and forward it to another single port when that port is avaiable. There are no collisions. Further, switches are full duplex and can therefore send and receive simultaneously (provided you use Category 5 or better cables - hubs require Category 3 or better cables - or in some cases, coax). This effectively makes a switched network faster than one using hubs, especially during high traffic periods.

So when is a hub still preferred? - whenever you will be frequently moving devices between Ethernet ports.
Unmanaged switches memorize the devices connected to them at first use of a port. If you change the device connected to that port, the switch doesn't know this. If you frequently move devices between ports, they often will fail to work because the switch thinks they are still connected to a different port. To clear the problem, you have to reset the switch and allow it to re-learn the new device locations.
Whenever you have multiple users, you will eventually inconvenience someone when you kill the network to reset a switch.

The best advice is to use switches in areas where the connections are pretty static, and use hubs in areas where the physical devices are expected to move around. The two devices can readily work together on the same local area network, but of course you will want to make sure that you don't place a hub in between switches or you will create a bottleneck at that point.

- Collapse -
So for me...
May 13, 2005 12:53AM PDT

I have 5 >1yr old XP PC's in our office. No one moves. Everyone has dial up (a whole other issue). A switch like a Linksys SD208 should be fine if we need to borrow files and use other peoples printers.

- Collapse -
following the point made by jimmy....
May 13, 2005 7:03AM PDT

I have a wireless network with 7 computer, I use a 4 ports wireless router (switch) all computer are connected wirelessly exept the server (windows 200 server) do I need more ports or are the ports only for wired computers.. meaning that the other computers only use the ip interface from the router

- Collapse -
Can I butt in
May 13, 2005 6:15AM PDT

with a question of my own? I'm buying a BT Voyager 205 modem/router next week ... fed-up with my USB one. I have Ethernet already installed in the PC and I know it's a network tool but I don't want to set-up a network just yet so what I want to know is this ... will it be okay to use just with one PC for a couple of months as this will be the main PC the network will run from eventually.
I don't know a thing about it so I would be grateful for any thing in plain english, it is about the only internet thing I don't know sweet FA about.

Thanks in Advance,
Whikesnake

- Collapse -
In short... Yes
May 15, 2005 8:42AM PDT

You can use an ethernet connection on the new box just as easily as the USB. You may even see a better speed internet connection as Ethernet operates much more quickly than USB. As a nice side effect, if you ever want to add a second PC to your internet connection, you simply plug it into your new box (potentially with some configuration)and don't have to either buy a second one, or fiddle with the exisiting PC

- Collapse -
Routers/Switches
Jun 7, 2005 5:42PM PDT

First of all i would like to say thanks alot to everyone that took their time on replying my question about Router/switch, i really appritiate it. I have finally bought the NetgearDG834ADSL Firewall Router & a Swicth. I have installed everything, the Server and the other Pcs can connect to the internet but i cant see or controll any of the PCs from the Server & neither do i see the Server from the other PC's, but they seem to be connnecting to the net independently.What i did was connect the Server(Serv2003) 2 Hosts(XPhome) to the switch then connnected the Router to the switch.Even when i try to ping the other PC's it says it did not find any Pcs

- Collapse -
Start a new discussion.
Jun 7, 2005 9:59PM PDT

But your issue sounds like someone has firewalls installed and working.

Bob

- Collapse -
Linksys (LINUX)
May 13, 2005 8:12AM PDT

The best bang for your buck is a Linksys WRT54G 4 port wireless Router. You wonder Why! Well its based on LINUX and there is software available from http://sveasoft.com/
that will allow you to upgrade the Firmware to a very powerfull set of tools. A few of the perks are the ability to up the power output from 28ma to 250 ma and select the transmit and receive antena's just to mention a few. Now go and purchase a 9dbi antena from CompUSA for the Router and you will have better than any of the new fangled long range systems being sold that use their own hardware to accomplish their projections. The Alchemy firmware is free but you can get the best New Talisman Firmware when you pay for a year of support and updates.

Can any of this be done with a Hub or Switch.... Nope! This will create a real HOT SPOT!

- Collapse -
switch or router
May 15, 2005 5:28AM PDT

If you want to have all the internet traffic go through one computer you need a switch. If you alreday have a Hub and not a switch it will do for experiments. Two ports on the server/computer. A network card to connect to your local network, and another NIC or a USB port to connect to your Cable/DSL Modem. The switch connects your local network together. Unlike a hub different ports on a Switch can run at different speeds.
In my cast I have a router connected to my cable modem. It feeds my Vonage Phone server and my gigabit switch which feeds all my computers. The router adds a hardware firewall in addition to ZoneAlarm on each of my other computers. I have planned to add an old computer running smothwall between my cable modem and my router.