2 switches to a router

[techitechi]

i have 2 switches because simply put, not enough room on the router.
but should i connect both switches to the router using 2 ports on the router? Or, cascade, one switch connected into the other's switch port?
Which is more efficient ? or faster? ( i know switches operate at gig speeds but routers normally don't) .
I know switches pass frames way faster then it would have to go through the router as packets?
which is the best topology 1 router + 2 switches - same LAN network?

 

[USAFRet]

Either way works, with zero performance difference.

Currently, I have cascading switches.
Previous, they were both off the router.

Zero difference.

 

[techitechi]

nice to know, how many pc's or devices do you have hooked up? On ours, we have around 15 pcs / printers ...

 

[techitechi]

even though the upstream router issues ip addresses, does local traffic have to go through the router ( i would think that would be slow if it did, unpacking at 100 mbps instead of frames at 1000 mbps through the switch)

 

[USAFRet]

nice to know, how many pc's or devices do you have hooked up? On ours, we have around 15 pcs / printers ...

hmm...if I had to count, maybe 20(?). Almost all wired, and 3-4 wireless.

 

[USAFRet]

1. Most current routers do have 10/100/1000 ports. Not just 100Mbps.
2. 2 devices connected to the same switch...it only goes through that switch.

 

[giantbucket]

buy a larger switch, maybe? I use a TP-Link 48-port at the office and it only cost around $250. in a year of 24/7 use, I've only had to reboot it once.

 

[techitechi]

on your 2nd answer, even though the 2 pc's have ip address given by the upstream router, the 2 pc's wont go all the way up to the router for exchanging each others files / data?

 

[techitechi]

i have an 8 port /1000 on the lower floor and a 24 port on the upper floor...itll be a lot of wiring to get all the lower devices on the upstairs switch..
i think it makes more sense to have all the lower pc's on the lower switch with 1 LAN wire going to the upstairs switch or router
I think i was answered earlier saying no diff connecting the lower floor switch into the upper switch and then the upper switch into the router or,
both switches into the router (2 ports of the router)

 

[USAFRet]

buy a larger switch, maybe? I use a TP-Link 48-port at the office and it only cost around $250. in a year of 24/7 use, I've only had to reboot it once.

I have 2 x 8 ports, and 1 x 5 port. 25% of your $250 price.
Running 24/7 for a couple years, and have had to reboot them exactly zero times.

 

[USAFRet]

i have an 8 port /1000 on the lower floor and a 24 port on the upper floor...itll be a lot of wiring to get all the lower devices on the upstairs switch..
i think it makes more sense to have all the lower pc's on the lower switch with 1 LAN wire going to the upstairs switch or router
I think i was answered earlier saying no diff connecting the lower floor switch into the upper switch and then the upper switch into the router or,
both switches into the router (2 ports of the router)

A single Cat5e off the 24 port down to the 8 port will work just fine.

 

[USAFRet]

on your 2nd answer, even though the 2 pc's have ip address given by the upstream router, the 2 pc's wont go all the way up to the router for exchanging each others files / data?

Correct.

 

[techitechi]

perfect! that's exact what i had in mind...
off the record... is the topology usually better to have 'network traffic' flow through a switch rather than cramming it all in a router? I mean, doesn't the router have to do a thorough unpacking repacking the data packets -which is kinda overkill for network file sharing. Wouldn't that generally be slower as a result going through a router?
( don't get me wrong, i don't at all plan to put any devices ALL into a router) ....just curious, well actually i want to know lol

 

[USAFRet]

perfect! that's exact what i had in mind...
off the record... is the topology usually better to have 'network traffic' flow through a switch rather than cramming it all in a router? I mean, doesn't the router have to do a thorough unpacking repacking the data packets -which is kinda overkill for network file sharing. Wouldn't that generally be slower as a result going through a router?
( don't get me wrong, i don't at all plan to put any devices ALL into a router) ....just curious, well actually i want to know lol

No difference really. The 4 ports on the back of a typical consumer grade router are exactly the same as a standalone switch.
Upstream (in the same plastic box) is the router software, which does the DHCP functions, etc. Upstream from that maybe the modem functions, again in the same physical plastic box.

 

[techitechi]

hmmmm ok

 

[techitechi]

yeah i heard in essence a router is a combo switch with a DHCP server kinda thing..
but a router is a packet domain network?
whereas, a switch is a broadcast domain?
if there is a router hooked up - upstream, do ALL broadcast stop? would that mean, even if 2 pcs want to share a file, does it have to go all the way up to the router - get upacked ( all that stuff the router does) just for sharing a file on the same network?
you would think it would jut go through the switch as a 'frame' though ( like a rapid expedite)

 

[USAFRet]

An old style 'hub' is a broadcast thing. Sends everything to every device, and expects the devices to figure out what they are supposed to be getting.
A switch sends only the requested data to a specific device.

 

[techitechi]

yeah a hub is a 'collision domain' All pcs send their broadcast at once hence collision domain but a switch learns.
it writes all the MAC's on table so as you say, the next time it needs to communicate, the switch looks up the MAC table ( not an ip table since no dhcp related)

 

[bill001g]

The best way to look a the lan ports on router is as a 5 port switch. You can see 4 ports that you can connect your equipment to. The 5th port is actual on the circuit board between the router chip and the switch chip. It is pretty much the same as if you connected a 1 port router to a 5 port switch externally.

The traffic between pc will go directly port to port in the switch and never go up the path to the router. If it was external you could power off the router and the pc could still talk as long as they didn't need something from the internet or time out the dhcp lease on their ip address.

 

[techitechi]

so if any of the pcs directly connected to it ( the router )need to share a file amongst each other.... since it goes in and out of the 4 ports, there is no extensive packet disassembly? meaning it'll treat the data as though it where a switch ? a quick in and out?

 

[USAFRet]

so if any of the pcs directly connected to it ( the router )need to share a file amongst each other.... since it goes in and out of the 4 ports, there is no extensive packet disassembly? meaning it'll treat the data as though it where a switch ? a quick in and out?

Yes. Think of it as a 4 port switch. Which is what it is.

 

[techitechi]

it would be all the matter of traffic control....I would rather have all the PC's share each others files via a switch rather than go all the way up into a router ( even though the data is treated as though it were going through a switch).
More so for downstairs because if the lower floor share files with each other ( accounting) a lot. It would make more sense for the data to flow through the switch ( compartmentalized figuratively speaking) rather than bog down the router if all the devices where connected to it wouldn't you think? ( almost like designing a highway flow control)

 

[bill001g]

You are likely over analyzing your problem. The fewest devices things can pass through is always best but when you are looking at equipment that can send 1g up and 1g down on every port all at the same time does it really matter. You tend to find bottlenecks in the equipment you hook to the switches well before you can overload the switch. I suppose you can come up with some case where you could use more than 1g and it could bottleneck you but it is highly unlikely in a normal home environment.

Still if you even think you can approach needing a gig of traffic on a port then you do what commercial customers do to solve that and buy equipment with 10g ports.