I am thinking of wiring my house since the wireless signal won't
reliably get through the walls. If I put a hub in the attic with
jacks in each room I want wired, do I use a straight-through or a
crossover cable from the router to the wall jack to put internet
access throughout the network.

Thanks AFJ

On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 21:02:25 -0500, Air Force Jayhawk
<airforcejayhawk@comcast.net> wrote:

If the router has an "uplink" port, you can use a straight cable.
If the router doesn't have an "uplink" port, but the switch doesn, you can
still use a straight cable.
If neither end has an uplink port, you'll need a crossover.

Note that most soho network appliances share the electronics between uplink
ports and one of the "normal" ports. You can't use both (and hence an
eight-port switch with an uplink port really does have only eight ports
total).

cheers

/daytripper

Thanks...AFJ


On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 02:47:38 GMT, daytripper
<day_trippr@REMOVEyahoo.com> wrote:

PC to PC = Cross-over
PC to Router/Hub/Switch = Straight-Through (Router/Hub/Switch) do the
"crossover" themselves.


On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 21:02:25 -0500, Air Force Jayhawk
<airforcejayhawk@comcast.net> wrote:

"Air Force Jayhawk" <airforcejayhawk@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:4oeg20dr6rc9m6dbu740qun12t698f39fg@4ax.com...
On a slightly different note, have you considered using Home Phoneline
Networking (HPNA) instead putting a hub in the attic? If your rooms already
have telephone jacks in them, then you're already networked.

Yousuf Khan

On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 01:25:04 GMT, "Yousuf Khan"
<news.tally.bbbl67@spamgourmet.com> wrote:

Not crazy about those systems...friend had one, didn't work out well.
I know, one data point, but running a line will be easy, just can't
figure out the cable configuration I need.

router -> RJ-45 wall jack -> hub -> RJ-45 wall jack -> computer

Each arrow is a cable...do any need to be a crossover?

AFJ

Air Force Jayhawk wrote:
appropriate.


--
After being targeted with gigabytes of trash by the "SWEN" worm, I have
concluded we must conceal our e-mail address. Our true address is the
mirror image of what you see before the "@" symbol. It's a shame such
steps are necessary. ...Charlie

On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 20:51:06 -0500, Air Force Jayhawk
<airforcejayhawk@comcast.net> wrote:


Did this once before, but...

Router to wall jack:
- if the router has an uplink port, you use straight cable from router uplink
to wall jack

- if the router doesn't have an uplink port but the switch does, you use
straight cable router to wall jack

- if neither router nor switch has an uplink port, use a cross-over between
the router and the wall jack

Wall jack to Wall jack = straight
Wall jack to Hub = straight
Hub to Wall jack = straight
Wall jack to Wall jack = straight
Wall jack to Computer = straight

/daytripper

Haven't bought a hub yet...but my router simply has "signal in" and
four "signal out" RJ-45 slots. No clue as to what uplink is.

I have been told that most hubs and routers these days and can
automatically ID crossover signals, but I don't think my router does.

I understand the earlier post about only using straight cables in
walls...that was my plan, so as to not mess with the next owners mind,
was mostly concerned with the router to jack to hub connections



On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 02:32:31 GMT, daytripper
<day_trippr@REMOVEyahoo.com> wrote:

On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 17:41:58 -0500, Air Force Jayhawk
<airforcejayhawk@comcast.net> wrote:
An "uplink" port on most if not all soho network appliances is nothing more
than one of the "normal" ports daisy-chained to a second RJ45 socket that has
been cross-wired. ie, it's an "internal cross-over", but as it uses the same
logical port hardware, you can't use the uplink port and its corresponding
"normal" port.

otoh, if the hub or switch is capable of this, you can still do the entire
circuit with straight cables.

So, again, if neither your router or your eventual hub or switch have uplink
ports, you'll need a cross-over cable between the router and the wall jack
heading for the hub or switch.

btw, buy a switch, not a hub...

/daytripper

daytripper wrote:

I have discovered the hard way that at least certain cheap switches
can exhibit high latencies and dropped packets, actually making a hub
the better choice. But normally I would agree -- switches OUGHT to
be a lot better than hubs. I'd rather not say which ones I'm having
a problem with until their tech support people have a chance to explain
what I'm seeing; so far all they've told me is that their product "will
have problems with some kind[s] of network adapter" (with the quotation
being snipped from an e-mail their tech support sent me) but they
haven't yet told me what distinguishes some network adapters from
others, nor the nature of the problem that can arise.


--
After being targeted with gigabytes of trash by the "SWEN" worm, I have
concluded we must conceal our e-mail address. Our true address is the
mirror image of what you see before the "@" symbol. It's a shame such
steps are necessary. ...Charlie