Hi all , i'm running a router with just 1 eithernet & 1 usb port
(Creative Broadband Blaster DSL Router). i cant use both ports at once i.e
The usb Port and the eithernet port. What i'm trying to do is get the net
access to another 3 pc's and a PS2 also setting up a home network , the
router has a firewall built into it aswell as nat, would it be better
going for a 4 port switch with uplink port or a 4 port hub with uplink to
share the net connection aswell as the home network? if someone could give
me some advice how to set it up or what hardware i would need , i would be
gratfull

Switches are better than hubs, there's not much difference in price really.
Both will work but a switch will work better for file transfers around the
network though for Internet connection speeds it won't make much of a
difference.


--
Colin
*Drop DEAD from the email address to reply*

On Thu, 19 May 2005 22:33:13 +0100, Toonz <fuckyou@fuckyou.com> wrote:

This is a one-port router.

Thats how this unit works - it says so in the spec: "gives you a
choice to choose between using an Ethernet or USB interface".

You would need to get a 4-port router to replace the 1-port one, or a
switch to plug into the one port.

Get a switch. Performance is better and the cost is much the same.
Better yet, upgrade to a multiport router.

Mark McIntyre <markmcintyre@spamcop.net> wrote in
news:fl4q811ic7bpass2nvanrbdka16uu471ag@4ax.com:

There is really little point except from saving space. One could even
argue that separate devices are better due to not having a single point
of failure.
--
Colin
*Drop DEAD from the email address to reply*

"cw" <usenet@fidei.DEADco.uk> wrote in message
news:Xns965C538F7376Acwfidei@212.159.2.87...
With 2 devices you have double the chance of something failing.

In response to what Depresion <blank@128.0.0.1> posted in news:vlgje.13579
$sE4.8090@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net:

Would you rather cross the Atlantic in a four-engined or single-engined
plane?

--
Joe Soap.
JUNK is stuff that you keep for 20 years,
then throw away a week before you need it.

cw <usenet@fidei.deadco.uk> wrote:
Eh?

It's worse because you have *two* places where a failure will bring
the system down (well, your connectivity anyway). If either the
switch or the router fails your internet connection is stuffed. Thus
you have two 'single points of failure' and are worse off from the
reliability point of view.

--
Chris Green - at home

Joe Soap <me@privacy.net> wrote:
prefer the single engined plane. This is the true analogy as both the
router and the switch are required to work to have an internet
connection. The system is no use if *either* of them fails.

--
Chris Green - at home

On 20 May 2005 08:53:33 GMT, usenet@isbd.co.uk wrote:

however the LAN would still work if the separate modem/router died and
the switch/hub was separate.

Phil
--
Tiscali - dialup speeds at Broadband prices.
AOL - the unlimited ISP of choice for heavy downloaders.

In article <Xns965C56F3E26C8831041831041@130.133.1.4>,
Joe Soap <me@privacy.net> writes:
Well that would depend. Assume all engines have equal reliability. Were
the loss of one engine fatal for the four-engined plane, then your
chances are four times better in the single-engined. However, if the
loss of one engine is survivable for the four-engined (as is likely to
be the case), then your chances are better in the four-engined.

Whether more is better depends whether the configuration is single point
of failure, or multiple redundancy. The router/switch configuration
described is a single point of failure one - so a single device is
better.

Although reliability of devices is pretty high, the more complex a
situation is and the more devices which have to be configured the more
scope there is for human error - and the more work there is trying to
find where the problem lies. Money permitting, that's the main thing
which would make me go for the single device.

--
Tim Clark

Toonz wrote:
Erm.... your port count seems adrift here

Existing pc
plus another 3 pc's
plus PS2
plus connection to router

Makes 6 ports if my maths is correct.
Another point if you use printers it would make sense to network the
printer, making 7 ports.

From this a ADSL wireless gateway, something like a Linksys WAG54G
perhaps, maybe the cost effective option.

You need to clarify your intended setup, total number of devices to
connected, what the pc's are goint to be used for, any data cabling in
place already etc etc

<snip> Thanks all for the advice going to get myself a switch tommorow ,
cant afford a new 4 port modem/router and this creative one does me for
what i need it to do :-) the one i've seen is a sweex 4 port with wan port
for £9.99 all it's for is to connect this pc , me PS2 and 2 other pc's i
meant in my orginal post 3 pc's and a ps2 not another 3 pcs and a ps2
sorry for getting that information wrong. and i've looked on the sweex web
site and the hub/switch will work with an adsl/cable modem/router aswell
as network'ing the pc's together , so thank you all for giving me some
advice

"Depresion" <blank@128.0.0.1> wrote in news:vlgje.13579$sE4.8090@newsfe3-
gui.ntli.net:

I'm sorry but I'm going to have to call bullshit on that one.
In both cases you have the same devices, you have a switch and a router.
It just so happens that in one case they are in the same box and one case
they are in separate boxes.

--
Colin
*Drop DEAD from the email address to reply*

Phil Thompson <phil.thompson@spamcop.net> wrote in
news:s1br81p5faut8g04irgv5kkksrtb0743a4@4ax.com:


On top of that, if they are both in the same box you have to replace the
whole lot if one part fails whilst if in separate boxes you only have to
replace the failed part.

--
Colin
*Drop DEAD from the email address to reply*

usenet@isbd.co.uk wrote in news:3f5mpbF6097uU7@individual.net:

Again to my point where you still have exactly the same devices
regardless of where they are physically located.

--
Colin
*Drop DEAD from the email address to reply*

On 20 May 2005 07:12:18 GMT, cw <usenet@fidei.DEADco.uk> wrote:

Depends on traffic. If you bought a 10Mb hub, and had 5 clients on a
2Mb broadband line, you would max out the link from hub to
modem/router. Admittedly, buying a 10Mb hub would be daft.

Actually, you have TWO single points of failure with this method -
think about it...

On 20 May 2005 15:34:02 GMT, cw <usenet@fidei.DEADco.uk> wrote:

but with separate power supplies, an extra cable between them, and two
sets of electonics to overheat / get coffee spilled on them / etc.

TBH there's no 'right' answer. To extend it to the logical conclusion,
the modem should also be separate....

Mark McIntyre <markmcintyre@spamcop.net> wrote in
news:s2js8154j1mm85onru0grpbbrpfmjf0sdh@4ax.com:

I'm with you until "two sets of electronics". When you have them both in
the one box - you have the two sets of electronics in that one box so
that would be more things generating heat in one box.
Spilling things on them is just stupid. Ours are nicely tucked out of
harms way (unless you count BT engineers buggering about with things they
should be touching).

--
Colin
*Drop DEAD from the email address to reply*

Mark McIntyre <markmcintyre@spamcop.net> wrote in
news:6tis81lemj8pi4pi3ejd8p8n3bqj6q6stu@4ax.com:

How do you work that one out? The broadband line is 2Mb. No matter
whether you have 1, 5 or 50 clients running through that connection, it
will still be 2Mb unless you're going to hook in a new router and DSL
connection for each client - in which case a 10 meg hub would be a little
more than daft. :0)

For the third time, you still have both of those devices regardless of
whether they are in one box or two although as suggested the extra
cabling is an additional point of failure although decent cables
shouldn't be a problem.

--
Colin
*Drop DEAD from the email address to reply*

<snip>

and just before i close this ranting and raving lol omney what u were on
about before, the switch i've just bought is a 5 port one. i can use any
of the ports as an uplink so got that on top of the modem/router a
eithernet cable comming out of that into port 1 on the switch , port 2 is
my pc in the front room , port 3 is the PS2 in the front room got an
eithernet socket on the bottom of the wall next to the phone socket that
goes to the other side of the front room behind the tv for the PS2 , port
4 is for me step son's computer upstairs in his bedroom and port 5 is for
my Parners pc in the back room (not gonna be sharing a printer on here for
a long time) what i've just said ere is what i meant to say before about
the number of pc's to connect and PS2. Not this pc , another 3 pc's and
the pS2 , hope that clears that up