One more sleep to FTTC!

Pathetic I know, but my connection to date really is that desperate.

My router (HH2) is currently downstairs by the NTE 5 point, and my desktop is upstairs via a 7m ethernet lead. Will buy a new router when I have seen how the land lies. Probably netgear wnr3700 or equivalent. I plan to move the router upstairs using the 7m lead as the link from the new OpenReach modem. That should improve the wireless signals for the iPhones etc.
I have started running cat5 to all "habitable rooms" in the house.

My question, is there a reliable adaptor/switch to connect 2 or 3 devices to one RJ45 point?
I have a PS3, separate BD player with LAN compatibility and an AV unit.

As they are all in one place and I will only being using them individually at any one point in time, I don't really need to run multiple cables if one will suffice.

Thanks.

There are splitters which allow 2 ports on a single cable but they restrict the speed to 100Mbps rather than 1Gbps.

It is no harder to run two cat5e cables at the same time than a single.

It is if you only need half a box in total. Don't fancy cutting off 20m and dragging it around the loft if I don't really need it. Just end up in a right old mess. If I was gonna flood wire the place then maybe, but I don't really foresee the need for Gigabit speeds by the telly.

Not for a while anyway

Any suggestions for the splitter? May try Maplin's later.

Huh? Am I reading this wrong, or are you guys asking for a switch? You can get cheap Gigabit-Switches for about 20 Quid, I guess you could call them an "adaptor"...

No need for splitters or two Cat5E cables, just connect a switch to your RJ45...

And just as an example, these two would do nicely:
http://www.novatech.co.uk/novatech/prods/networking/...
http://www.broadbandbuyer.co.uk/Shop/ShopDetail.asp?...

I read it that he wants a switch and just one cat5 going to each location but wanting to put two devices at each location.

I don' t really need all the hardware to talk to each other at the moment.
I just wanted wired connectivity for all devices, laptop in bedroom, desktop in office, and playstation and blu ray player in lounge.

I naively thought I could just use my HH2 router as a simple starting point, linked via patch leads to cat5e connected RJ45 modules?

The blu ray player and ps3 will never be used together so I didn't want the hassle of powered switches etc. if I could use a simple adaptor/splitter?

Thanks

Don't use RJ45 modules - but buy a small patch panel to terminate the cables on.

Then as yopu suggest use patch leads from your HH2 to the patch panel

At the other ends use RJ45 modules and a patch lead from there to the device.


If you go the patch panel route you can be sneaky and split the cat5 to two ports - but it will limit you to 100Mbps. Pins 1, 2, 3 & 6 using the Green and Orange pair in accordance with the standard spec. Then in a non standard way use Blue and Brown for 1, 2, 3 & 6 on a second termination.

Splitter You need one at each end too - this one is expensive but even at half the price, they are not worth it. Either run more cables or use the method I suggest below which does the same.

Granted, having another "power wart" is an inconvenience I hadn't taken into account, but if you can get future-proof, Gigabit speed network connectivity for < 20 GBP, I personally wouldn't even bother looking into any kind of splitter technology, which is bound to be at least 5 Quid as well.

I believe I had seen some physical splitter for RJ45 back in the olden days, but that might involve having to physically flick a switch between the devices, or at the very least absolutely positively at all times having to make sure that not more than one device is powered on at a time. That is easily forgotten with standby modes, background firmware upgrades etc. especially with devices such as the PS3. Is not having a power wart and saving 15 quid at most really worth the potential downsides?

Not worth the hassle in my book. One cable coming from your Homehub, terminating in an RJ45 wall socket is fine, and then hook up your Gigabit-Switch to that, and each device into the switch. Done. No configuration necessary either.

MHC, your patch panel solution makes more sense, but you either end up having to run two cables (which the OP doesn't want), or you lose Gigabit speeds. How much is a patch panel nowadays? Probably not that much cheaper than 20 Quid either...

The OP seems to want 2 devices at one location but only 1 cable! I still say two cables is the easiest way.

I don't like the splitters either - they work but are an expensive option! Splitting at the patch panel and sockets is a solution - not very clean but it should work and as we both know takes it down to 100Mbit only with no Gbit capability

Right, so in summary we have either running two cables to a patch panel, or having a seperate switch at the end of one cable. Nothing wrong with either approach to be honest, but I swear mine is more future proof

But he may want several locations with two devices ...

I would use a switch next to the router and pairs of cables - but the OP seems to want no more active devices and minimal cabling so that is what my solution does. No where near the best and not even good but it will give some capability!

Right then. The OP knows what he wants, but will readily listen to informed advice (i.e. you guys!)

I have spoken to a work colleague who will give me some cat5e or even cat6 if he has enough, and in different boxes. In that case I am happy to run two cables. I will be piping them through a tight loft space, and then down an external wall in plastic conduit, so having a couple of pre cut lengths catching on any and everything in their path would have been far more hassle than it was worth when doing the job alone.

My aversion to switches is that I don't properly understand their function, and didn't want to add devices or latency to anything if I didn't have to.

Do switches add anything in the way of latency?

What is the benefit of modules one end and patch panel at the other instead of modules?

If I use a switch from the router upstairs, I assume that is to give me more outlets from my router?

I want the cleanest fastest low latency option at the ps3. All of the upstairs stuff can be utilised via a switch if it makes life easier outlet wise.

Sorry to keep asking , thanks guys.

Do switches add anything in the way of latency?

More than a piece of wire but not really enough to notice. Typical latencies for 100Mb/s switches maybe 100us, for gigabit maybe 10-15us

Edit: That's consumer grade stuff BTW, more exotic switches only need to see the Ethernet header to decide which egress port to use and introduce very, very little latency.

Edited by mr_bean (Mon 18-Apr-11 20:06:03)

Your ADSL router has four ethernet ports, correct?

That is (usually) an ethernet switch. (On very cheap routers it can be a hub, not a switch, and hubs can slow things down).

So you've been using one for ages if you have more than one wired device .

Thanks for that

Switch Latency - nothing you would notice, almost certainly well under 1mS. My Gbit switch add tens of microseconds.

A patch panel is 8, 12,16 , 24, or 48 RJ45 modules in a single mounting and are designed to manage the cables too. And a patch panel will be a lot cheaper than using RJ 45 modules.

Use back boxes and modules at the other end where you have 1 or 2 sockets.

It will give you three advantages (at least) and a small 8 port switch is under £20

1. More ports available - just connect one link from router to switch

2. The switch does the work rather than put extra processing onto the hub - if a hub is heavily loaded managing the DSL/WAN interface, DHCP server, wireless interface, and the switching function, it can impact on the response times for interrupts and thus latency.

3. The switch can give you (providing you use all 4 pairs) 1Gbit networking which hubs tend not to do.


You can continue to use the hub for wireless and it will all look like one small network and if you want you could patch your games console direct to a port on the hub.


The cleanest way is 2 cat5e cables to each location and those brought back to a patch panel. Use short patch leads from panel to an 8 port switch. If you want to increase in future, just add another switch to the hub.

Thanks RobertoS.

So the only reason to install switches is to increase internal network speeds or expand the amount of connections on that network?

I assume that I will get a good enough performance for my up to 40meg connection on my existing router (HH2)?

Agreed - I have just tried Ping Plotter across my network which has a Cisco/Linksys 24 port switch. The result is 0 (zero) and with the granularity of the graph it looks to be under 50uS

You can continue to use the hub for wireless and it will all look like one small network and if you want you could patch your games console direct to a port on the hub.


The cleanest way is 2 cat5e cables to each location and those brought back to a patch panel. Use short patch leads from panel to an 8 port switch. If you want to increase in future, just add another switch to the hub.

I think I will follow this route. Install all cables to a patch panel and then patch leads to the HH2.

I intend to buy a better grade router in the near future and will revisit the switch discussion then. Either way giving the Ps3 its own port on the router. Having a future proof router will be the important part I think.

In reply to a post by mrnelster:

Thanks RobertoS.

I assume that I will get a good enough performance for my up to 40meg connection on my existing router (HH2)?

Not necessarily - as I say below, if te HH2 is doing the WAN/DSL interface, firewall, wireless, DHCP server, switching &c and is loaded then interrupts do not get processed immediately resulting in additional latency and a slow down in performance.

As you recognise, you can improve the hub/router and add a switch without any rewiring, just a few patch leads.

So, go with that and you have some future proofing.

The complexity of the discussion isn't helped by BT calling their supplied ADSL routers and now their cable routers Home Hubs .

@mrnelster - I assume you realise your existing HH2 (you are on BT?) won't work on FTTC? BT supply a cable version of the Home Hub, supposedly an HH3 but not always.

Edited by RobertoS (Mon 18-Apr-11 21:04:44)

Further to my post to MHC, with an "@mrnelster" about the HH2, are you going to BT FTTC or another ISP? As I say there, on Infinity, and I assume on their Option3 with Fibre, BT provide a cable version, but other ISPs do not.

You get the Openreach modem and have to buy a suitable router.

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

Further to my post to MHC, with an "@mrnelster" about the HH2, are you going to BT FTTC or another ISP? As I say there, on Infinity, and I assume on their Option3 with Fibre, BT provide a cable version, but other ISPs do not.

You get the Openreach modem and have to buy a suitable router.

No I didn't realise that. I am going with Aquiss, but there must have been some confusion as I believed the HH2 would work as a stop gap to my new router. Oops.

Did this in our upstairs. Was only able to run one cable through the ceiling for some reason (forget why) and had to split it using a simple splitter box included in a networking kit we got out of B&Q or somewhere like that for buttons. Works a treat to this day actually over the cat5 100mbit.

Switches are fine. You won't notice any difference. Your HH2 has one built in

Hubs are the spawn of satan and you'll be wanting to avoid them.

You could do:
HH2 ------single cable-------switch-------<several devices
|__other cable
|__other cable

Not unless it has a WAN port on the back of it...which it probably won't.

There are "infinity" home hubs that have this. The ADSL variety won't work.

You can connect by plugging the modem into a computer directly (I believe) and doing some old school internet connection sharing.

Thanks for spotting that RobertoS. I'm never usually that complacent, but would have been frothing if I couldn't get my ps3 going tonight!

I am now routered up and wondering if the BT engineer will ring and ask to come early. If he does, I'll dump the rich tea and crack open the peak freans.

Should I ask to see speeds and distance from cab, or is there anything else useful to know?

In reply to a post by mrnelster:

Should I ask to see speeds and distance from cab, or is there anything else useful to know?

If they test using a JDSU then you'll be able to ask, when they did mine they phoned through to somewhere and got the results back as a text on the engineers mobile. It only gives the most basic of info, so I only know what my sync speed was.

I am quite near to my cab, approx 108M straight line but still under 200M following the probable cable run.

In reply to a post by TheHorseman:

In reply to a post by mrnelster:

Should I ask to see speeds and distance from cab, or is there anything else useful to know?

If they test using a JDSU then you'll be able to ask, when they did mine they phoned through to somewhere and got the results back as a text on the engineers mobile. It only gives the most basic of info, so I only know what my sync speed was.

I am quite near to my cab, approx 108M straight line but still under 200M following the probable cable run.

Same for me.

The engineer phoned through and the texted reply said 39 meg sync.

I am only 50m straight line to the cab and the engineer agreed the route would be less than 200m.

Bit of last minute panic about a router and the engineer hadn't installed any 3rd party devices, only HH3's, but said he wasn't going to leave me without sync. I could of told him that. . Bless him.

Initial speeds 6meg down then 10 up! Started to settle upwards at about 25-28meg, though still low for that distance and strangely returning 0 ms pings at the moment? I think that will change however.

[img]http://speedtest.aquiss.net/result/29277/[/img]

5 minutes after the engineer left, got a call from Martin at Aquiss to discuss the sync and speeds etc.

I'm glad I put my money where my mouth is.

Edited by mrnelster (Tue 19-Apr-11 13:23:03)

Glad to see all went ok.

I was getting speed tests around 25-29Mbps on the iMac in the computer room but a lappy plugged into the Airport Extreme gave 35Mbps. So the homeplugs were swapped for a long ethernet cable and all is now ok.

The homeplugs were connecting at 90-100Mbps in both directions but throughput seemed to max out at just under 30Mbps (200Mbps AVs too).

So what did you do about a router, or are you connected to the modem?

Picked one up from pcworld before the enginer arrived. Only jusyt in time as he was due between 1-6pm, but rang at 10-30 to come at 11 am!

Speeds picked up slightly now. Still not sure about the latency though?

[IMG]http://www.speedtest.net/result/1259610235.png[/IMG]

In reply to a post by TheHorseman:

The homeplugs...snip.... (200Mbps AVs too).

What brand of homeplugs out of interest?

Aquiss tester.

[img]http://speedtest.aquiss.net/result/29294/[/img]

what option of aquiss did you take?

Assuming it's a business version due to the upload speed?

In reply to a post by aquiss:

In reply to a post by TheHorseman:

The homeplugs...snip.... (200Mbps AVs too).

What brand of homeplugs out of interest?

Devolo 200 AVs, though they are not the same generation, one is an earlier model than the other. They are both obsolete now I think. Both have the latest firmware too.

In reply to a post by orly:

what option of aquiss did you take?

Assuming it's a business version due to the upload speed?

Business 45, but i can change that whenever i like if it doesnt suit. We'll see how much more I use now i have the right connection.

30 quid for 45GB?

Definitely something odd about the latency ...

Try it on some distant servers and see what is returned.

Download speedachieved during the test was - 35900 Kbps

For your connection, the acceptable range of speedsis 12000-38717 Kbps .
Additional Information:

IP Profile for your line is -38717 Kbps-

2. Upstream Test: -provides background information.

Upload Speed
8163 Kbps

0 Kbps 10000 Kbps
Max Achievable Speed

>Upload speed achieved during the test was - 8163 Kbps
Additional Information:

Upstream Rate IP profile on your line is - 10000 Kbps




.

http://www.speedtest.net/result/1260486727.png

http://www.speedtest.net/result/1260510090.png

http://www.speedtest.net/result/1260511739.png

http://www.speedtest.net/result/1260513120.png

http://www.speedtest.net/result/1260514325.png

Still get zero ms on my local prefereed server (Milton Keynes)

I am also very close to my cabinet, though the engineer didnt have the meter to prove how close.

.

And still 0ms with the Aquiss tester.

[img]http://speedtest.aquiss.net/result/29326/[/img]


.

And still 0ms?

[img]http://speedtest.aquiss.net/result/29349/[/img]

Could it possibly be sub 1ms on less than 100m to the cabinet?


.

Just do a normal ping on cmd prompt

start > run > type cmd (hit enter) > type ping www.bbc.co.uk -n 20 > tell us the average

In reply to a post by orly:

Just do a normal ping on cmd prompt

start > run > type cmd (hit enter) > type ping www.bbc.co.uk -n 20 > tell us the average

Seven milliseconds average.

Not sure why it doesnt show up on the testers though.

.

7ms sounds about right for Milton Keynes to London

Doesn't explain why the testers keep tending to say 0 ms.

.

bugs...

good old ping will show you the real score

Even better, get Ping Plotter and use that with the target being the server hosting the speedtest.net download.

.