Setting up a 100+ wired ethernet network
April 28th, 2014
I have a job in a couple weeks setting up 100+ computers on a wired ethernet network.
A few questions:
Does an ethernet internet signal lose power if its been put through too many switchboxes? Or does the switchbox amplify the signal?
For example the unit will require several 16-port Hubs, if i plugged a 16 port hub into another 16 port hub, which is plugged into an 8 port hub which is plugged into the router.. will there become a point where the signal is noticably degraded?
The function of the computer systems do not require any large data usage on the network and will not be downloading anything.
The alternative to the Hub-hub-hub-router would be hub-router by running multiple 100-footers around the room.
In simpler terms, is it better to run each switchbox/hub individually to the modem or can i jump from one hub into another?
Mitch
The need for hosts to be able to detect collisions limits the number of hubs and the total size of a network built using hubs (a network built using switches does not have these limitations). For 10 Mbit/s networks built using repeater hubs, the 5-4-3 rule must be followed: up to 5 segments (4 hubs) are allowed between any two end stations.[2] For UTP (10baseT) networks, up to six segments and five repeaters are allowed between any two hosts. For 100 Mbit/s networks, the limit is reduced to 3 segments (2 hubs) between any two end stations, and even that is only allowed if the hubs are of Class II. Some hubs have manufacturer specific stack ports allowing them to be combined in a way that allows more hubs than simple chaining through Ethernet cables, but even so, a large fast Ethernet network is likely to require switches to avoid the chaining limits of hubs
Taken from here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethernet_hub
Don’t use Ethernet cables longer than 100 meters (328 feet),Also,If the connection’s actual speed is higher than 12.5 MB/s,Using
Gigabit Router/Switches/Ethernet cards is highly recommended,You may also find this article useful:
http://www.tested.com/news/cat5-vs-cat5e-vs-cat6-how-do-you-wire-your-network/676/
It explains the differences between Ethernet cable standards.
Edit: On a second thought,Using Gigabit equipment will be better (performance wise) regardless to the connection’s actual speed due to the vast number of users.
There is virtually no difference in pricing these days between a gigabit switch and a fast ethernet switch. If you don’t require manageability or layer 3 you can skip that and opt for a cheaper solution as well. Even if you decide on 100 Mbit at least get switches that stack with 1 Gbit. 100 users isn’t a lot it’s a tiny number. Depending on the layout of the building you could probably get away with 3-5 switches. That’s only around a day of work (if you plan well).
Does an ethernet internet signal lose power if its been put through too many switchboxes? Or does the switchbox amplify the signal? Signal != link speed. Link speed is same throughout the cable but signal is maintained optimally up to 300 feet. The uplink’s bandwidth will be shared amongst the computers/devices (common sense). If there is a large distance between two active locations opt for switches that have fiber stacking capability.
Btw where the heck do you buy hubs in this day and age?
In simpler terms, is it better to run each switchbox/hub individually to the modem or can i jump from one hub into another? The best way is to have a main/core switch or distribution area that delivers to the subswitches. The other method is rarely used and is pretty unorthodox and not recommended.
-paroxysM^ replied: The best way is to have a main/core switch or distribution area that delivers to the subswitches.
This may not be possible,It depends on the internal “plumbing” and how it’s designed,You can’t fit more than 2 or 3 Ethernet cables
in a single,Standard sized pipe,And if you got no dedicated pipes for Ethernet and you have to add em into existing ones used by phone/coax cables,Even less.