Hello listers I am still a newbie to linux but want to make a quantum leap in computing. I have zip-silch-zero experience in networks. However, there are now three computers here at home and I would sure like to tie them together. What I have: +Windows98 desktop +WindowsXP laptop (w/ T-mobile wireless installed - for my wife's work. +Linux box (SuSE8.2 running on an Asus A7N8X-Deluxe MB, 1 gig Ram, 160 gig HD. What references should I read first? What hardware do I need to buy? Would prefer to set up a wireless - but if it is not practical I can go the hardwire route. (My house is wired for telephone in every room and there are four pairs of wires in each box, but only one pair is being used for telephone service, do if worse comes to worst could I use some of those extra 6 wires?) Thanks in advance ===== Stephen W Sarasota, FL "A merry heart doeth good like a medicine ..." Proverbs __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Photos: High-quality 4x6 digital prints for 25� http://photos.yahoo.com/ph/print_splash
Hi Stephen On Saturday 17 April 2004 8:04 pm, Stephen W wrote:
Hello listers
I am still a newbie to linux but want to make a quantum leap in computing.
I have zip-silch-zero experience in networks. However, there are now three computers here at home and I would sure like to tie them together. What I have:
+Windows98 desktop
+WindowsXP laptop (w/ T-mobile wireless installed - for my wife's work.
+Linux box (SuSE8.2 running on an Asus A7N8X-Deluxe MB, 1 gig Ram, 160 gig HD.
For the above, a network is possible. As 2 of the 3 do window$, you are looking at running Samba on your network. Your biggest issue is establishing a configuration which will play with your wife's machine, while maintaining her work config. This could be an advanced topic, depending on what you want to do and how her work have configured the machine. I suggest you leave this to one side for the moment, but consider up front do you want to share files and printer, or will it be enough to share web access? In either case you will probably need to deal with DHCP, but for her machine you could have a tricky SAMBA configuration if you want to share files and printer, or not, if her work have not done anything too sophisticated.
What references should I read first?
I'll leave others to suggest. These days I do it out of my head, so be encouraged, I have only networked my own house.
What hardware do I need to buy? Would prefer to set up a wireless - but if it is not practical I can go the hardwire route. (My house is wired for telephone in every room and there are four pairs of wires in each box, but only one pair is being used for telephone service, do if worse comes to worst could I use some of those extra 6 wires?)
Networking down telephone wires is probably not impossible, but it is an advanced topic, which I would suggest you leave well alone for the time being. Firstly, a network requires a hub and a star layout. Domestic telephones are usually a bus layout, and I'll assume US practice is the same as UK on this one. Secondly, CAT5 network cable will probably do very nicely for phones, while UK CW1308 premises telephone cable will probably do a 10Mbit/s network with short runs, but will probably give you some grief which you might prefer to avoid. I suspect the US equivalent of CW1308 will be not a jot better. Thirdly, doing both in the same cable and mixing telephone voltages with your ethernet cards - and the issues of earthing, mutual capacitance and lightning protection are so advanced, that if you could frame the right questions, you might not be asking them here...
Thanks in advance
===== Stephen W Sarasota, FL
"A merry heart doeth good like a medicine ..." Proverbs
Hope that helps somewhat Vince Littler
Another esential question is weither the Linux machine (I assume the server) will run 24/7 or not. I doubt you will walk across your house to turn on the linux box so your wife can get on to the internet! I often suggest that people use wireless, But please test to see if the wireless works (Physically test connection between where the computers will stand!). I've often been surprised at where it does not work. (And once or twice also I was also surprised at where it does work!). Jerry On Sat, 2004-04-17 at 22:21, Vince Littler wrote:
Hi Stephen
On Saturday 17 April 2004 8:04 pm, Stephen W wrote:
Hello listers
I am still a newbie to linux but want to make a quantum leap in computing.
I have zip-silch-zero experience in networks. However, there are now three computers here at home and I would sure like to tie them together. What I have:
+Windows98 desktop
+WindowsXP laptop (w/ T-mobile wireless installed - for my wife's work.
+Linux box (SuSE8.2 running on an Asus A7N8X-Deluxe MB, 1 gig Ram, 160 gig HD.
For the above, a network is possible. As 2 of the 3 do window$, you are looking at running Samba on your network.
Your biggest issue is establishing a configuration which will play with your wife's machine, while maintaining her work config. This could be an advanced topic, depending on what you want to do and how her work have configured the machine.
I suggest you leave this to one side for the moment, but consider up front do you want to share files and printer, or will it be enough to share web access? In either case you will probably need to deal with DHCP, but for her machine you could have a tricky SAMBA configuration if you want to share files and printer, or not, if her work have not done anything too sophisticated.
What references should I read first?
I'll leave others to suggest. These days I do it out of my head, so be encouraged, I have only networked my own house.
What hardware do I need to buy? Would prefer to set up a wireless - but if it is not practical I can go the hardwire route. (My house is wired for telephone in every room and there are four pairs of wires in each box, but only one pair is being used for telephone service, do if worse comes to worst could I use some of those extra 6 wires?)
Networking down telephone wires is probably not impossible, but it is an advanced topic, which I would suggest you leave well alone for the time being. Firstly, a network requires a hub and a star layout. Domestic telephones are usually a bus layout, and I'll assume US practice is the same as UK on this one. Secondly, CAT5 network cable will probably do very nicely for phones, while UK CW1308 premises telephone cable will probably do a 10Mbit/s network with short runs, but will probably give you some grief which you might prefer to avoid. I suspect the US equivalent of CW1308 will be not a jot better. Thirdly, doing both in the same cable and mixing telephone voltages with your ethernet cards - and the issues of earthing, mutual capacitance and lightning protection are so advanced, that if you could frame the right questions, you might not be asking them here...
Thanks in advance
===== Stephen W Sarasota, FL
"A merry heart doeth good like a medicine ..." Proverbs
Hope that helps somewhat
Vince Littler
Vince - and all:
snip <<<<<<
I have zip-silch-zero experience in networks. However, there are now three computers here at home and I would sure like to tie them together. What
snip <<<<
For the above, a network is possible. As 2 of the 3 do window$, you are looking at running Samba on your network.
Your biggest issue is establishing a configuration which will play with your wife's machine, while maintaining her work config. This could be an advanced topic, depending on what you want to do and how her work have configured the machine.
Better leave that alone ... the IT Admin at work has qthing passworded and nothing can be changed unlwss he does it... He is willing to have her bring in anything she wants loaded and does it for her. She would like to have asscess to a lot of files she has on her old M$ desktop here at home without dumping it to a floppy and then taking it to the laptop. Would seem that is not a good idea... What I may do is just put the two boxes side-beside here at my desk and set a switch box between them to share the monitor. Another problem I was wanting to get around was I-net access... sometimes her wireless connection doe snot work here at home... and I thought if a home LAN could be established she could use that. O well, ...
As for a hard-wire solution: My house is wired for telephone in every room and there are four pairs of wires in each box, but only one pair is being used for telephone service, do if worse comes to worst could I use some of those extra 6 wires?)
Networking down telephone wires is probably not impossible, but it is an advanced topic, which I would suggest you leave well alone for the time
Thirdly, doing both in the same cable and mixing telephone voltages with your ethernet cards - and the issues of earthing, mutual capacitance and lightning protection are so advanced, that if you could frame the right questions, you might not be asking them here...
The extra wires in the boxes are not connected to anything... only the blue/white pair are used to provide phone connections. The orange/white - green/white and brown/white are unused and not connected to anything... just part aof the cable that runs from box to box... ===== Stephen W Sarasota, FL "A merry heart doeth good like a medicine ..." Proverbs __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Photos: High-quality 4x6 digital prints for 25� http://photos.yahoo.com/ph/print_splash
On Sat, 2004-04-17 at 23:42, Stephen W wrote:
The extra wires in the boxes are not connected to anything... only the blue/white pair are used to provide phone connections. The orange/white - green/white and brown/white are unused and not connected to anything... just part aof the cable that runs from box to box...
They are not network (ethernet) quality wires. Do yourself a favor: Forget them. Since you didn't know that, you are not an electrician with the specialized skills to able to use them, so heed my word.... Forget them! Jerry
On Saturday 17 April 2004 10:42 pm, Stephen W wrote:
Vince - and all:
As for a hard-wire solution: My house is wired for telephone in every room and there are four pairs of wires in each box, but only one pair is being used for telephone service, do if worse comes to worst
could I
use some of those extra 6 wires?)
Networking down telephone wires is probably not impossible, but it is an advanced topic, which I would suggest you leave well alone for the time
Thirdly, doing both in the same cable and mixing telephone voltages with your ethernet cards - and the issues of earthing, mutual capacitance and lightning protection are so advanced, that if you could frame the right questions, you might not be asking them here...
The extra wires in the boxes are not connected to anything... only the blue/white pair are used to provide phone connections.
That is what I expected
The orange/white - green/white and brown/white are unused and not connected to anything... just part of the cable that runs from box to box...
Which is why I said "Thirdly, doing both in the same cable..." If you want a wired setup, then you could investigate running more cable along the same routes. A proper CAT5 cable is about the same size as a phone cable. You will also need the proper ethernet wall plates. And you will need to find a place to locate a hub or a switch and wire each box back to the hub. You cannot run more than 1 machine on any cable to the hub. Vince
On Saturday 17 April 2004 06:34 pm, Vince Littler wrote:
On Saturday 17 April 2004 10:42 pm, Stephen W wrote:
Vince - and all:
As for a hard-wire solution: My house is wired for telephone in every room and there are four pairs of wires in each box, but only one pair is being used for telephone service, do if worse comes to worst
could I
use some of those extra 6 wires?)
Networking down telephone wires is probably not impossible, but it is an advanced topic, which I would suggest you leave well alone for the time
Thirdly, doing both in the same cable and mixing telephone voltages with your ethernet cards - and the issues of earthing, mutual capacitance and lightning protection are so advanced, that if you could frame the right questions, you might not be asking them here...
The extra wires in the boxes are not connected to anything... only the blue/white pair are used to provide phone connections.
That is what I expected
The orange/white - green/white and brown/white are unused and not connected to anything... just part of the cable that runs from box to box...
Which is why I said "Thirdly, doing both in the same cable..."
If you want a wired setup, then you could investigate running more cable along the same routes. A proper CAT5 cable is about the same size as a phone cable. You will also need the proper ethernet wall plates. And you will need to find a place to locate a hub or a switch and wire each box back to the hub. You cannot run more than 1 machine on any cable to the hub.
Vince
I would *not* plan on using any telephone wiring unless you want a) problems and b) a really slow network. Cat5 is pretty fussy stuff if you've ever made up your own cables. The wiring must be done in a specific manner or it's not going to cut it. -- +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ + Bruce S. Marshall bmarsh@bmarsh.com Bellaire, MI 04/17/04 19:14 + +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ "If you eat yogurt you'll have lots of culture."
<SNIP>
Better leave that alone ... the IT Admin at work has qthing passworded and nothing can be changed unlwss he does it... He is willing to have her bring in anything she wants loaded and does it for her.
A technique I have used in the past is to give the network at home the same IP range as that at work. Alternatively you could look for the LMHOSTS file on the XP machine, put a route to your network in there and then just connect to the network and try connecting to your Linux machine. Getting internet access through this methid may be a bit trickier, but it also worked when I did it at home, I did it by using an internet proxy server and changing the IE6 settings for the proxy server back and forth. If the IE6 settings can't be changed you could give the network card on the linux machine an IP address the same as the proxy at work. If you use the IP range from the work laptop and it's not a private one remember to make sure that it is not visible on the internet (needs to be behind a router or your linux box doing NAT for it). <SNIP>
The extra wires in the boxes are not connected to anything... only the blue/white pair are used to provide phone connections. The orange/white - green/white and brown/white are unused and not connected to anything... just part aof the cable that runs from box to box...
You should avoid mixing telephone and network wiring. Telephone wires carry anything upto about 50 volts DC which will fry anything that you connect it to on your computer (by mistake, but plan for it to happen!). Also, even though they are insulated the wires do communicate with each other because of the electro-magnetic field around them. Even in wires carrying a relatively low voltage this can be a problem, which is why the specification for Cat5 is so stringent compared with telephone cables. If you add the telephone voltages to the mix you will almost certainly cause you network problems, but you could also cause problems on the telephone that may affect the quality of dial-up internet access. Hope this helps Damon
Damon Jebb wrote:
You should avoid mixing telephone and network wiring. Telephone wires carry anything upto about 50 volts DC which will fry anything that you connect it to on your computer (by mistake, but plan for it to happen!). Also, even though they are insulated the wires do communicate with each other because of the electro-magnetic field around them. Even in wires carrying a relatively low voltage this can be a problem, which is why the specification for Cat5 is so stringent compared with telephone cables. If you add the telephone voltages to the mix you will almost certainly cause you network problems, but you could also cause problems on the telephone that may affect the quality of dial-up internet access.
Ethernet (10 base T) was designed to work over existing phone wiring. The frequencies used by phones and ethernet are so far apart, that interference in either direction is unlikely. Also, the NICs are designed to safely handle a few hundred volts. Also, PoE (Power over Ethernet) places power directly on the pairs used by ethernet.
What hardware do I need to buy? Would prefer to set up a wireless - but if it is not practical I can go the hardwire route. (My house is wired for telephone in every room and there are four pairs of wires in each box, but only one pair is being used for telephone service, do if worse comes to worst could I use some of those extra 6 wires?)
You need only 2 pairs for 100Mbit, I don't see any problems with using the same cable for both telephone and network. (I'm using 1 cable for 2 computers on each sides). Sure telephone does use other voltage, but it will simply run on other cable, and i'm sure that it won't interfere with the network much. Let_Me_Be mailto:SimonT@Seznam.CZ
On Apr 18 at 3:43am, Let_Me_Be wrote:
What hardware do I need to buy? Would prefer to set up a wireless - but if it is not practical I can go the hardwire route. (My house is wired for telephone in every room and there are four pairs of wires in each box, but only one pair is being used for telephone service, do if worse comes to worst could I use some of those extra 6 wires?)
You need only 2 pairs for 100Mbit, I don't see any problems with using the same cable for both telephone and network. (I'm using 1 cable for 2 computers on each sides). Sure telephone does use other voltage, but it will simply run on other cable, and i'm sure that it won't interfere with the network much.
You CAN use one cable for both ethernet and telephone, but the cable must be Category 5 or more for 100 Mbit. You cannot use the ordinary telephone wiring in your house for ethernet, unless it is at least Cat5. Cat5 cable is usually wired using one of two standards called EIA/TIA 568A or EIA/TIA 568B. A Google search for either one will return lots of pages about them. Here is one: http://www.pera.net/Category_5_Document.htm An ordinary Cat5 ethernet connector has 8 contacts (4 pair), but only contacts 1, 2, 3, and 6 are used for ethernet. Contacts 4, 5, 7, and 8 could be used for telephone. An interesting set of slides on UTP (unshielded twisted pair) wire can be found at: http://boulder.noaa.gov/noc/Training/noframes/sectionIII/sld001.htm Many other resources are available. Google can help.... Jim
On Sunday 18 April 2004 5:21 am, Jim Cunning wrote:
On Apr 18 at 3:43am, Let_Me_Be wrote:
What hardware do I need to buy? Would prefer to set up a wireless - but if it is not practical I can go the hardwire route. (My house is wired for telephone in every room and there are four pairs of wires in each box, but only one pair is being used for telephone service, do if worse comes to worst could I use some of those extra 6 wires?)
You need only 2 pairs for 100Mbit, I don't see any problems with using the same cable for both telephone and network. (I'm using 1 cable for 2 computers on each sides). Sure telephone does use other voltage, but it will simply run on other cable, and i'm sure that it won't interfere with the network much.
You CAN use one cable for both ethernet and telephone, but the cable must be Category 5 or more for 100 Mbit. You cannot use the ordinary telephone wiring in your house for ethernet, unless it is at least Cat5. Cat5 cable is usually wired using one of two standards called EIA/TIA 568A or EIA/TIA 568B. A Google search for either one will return lots of pages about them. Here is one: http://www.pera.net/Category_5_Document.htm
An ordinary Cat5 ethernet connector has 8 contacts (4 pair), but only contacts 1, 2, 3, and 6 are used for ethernet. Contacts 4, 5, 7, and 8 could be used for telephone. An interesting set of slides on UTP (unshielded twisted pair) wire can be found at:
http://boulder.noaa.gov/noc/Training/noframes/sectionIII/sld001.htm
Many other resources are available. Google can help....
Jim
Even then, some issues remain for the LAN at home. The context in which all you have brought applies is wiring of an office. In this case, the telephone system is a star layout and it has its own switch which effectively isolates the internal telephone network from the outside. So firstly, the domestic telephone system is a bus topology, because all phones pick up directly on the outside line. There is no place on such a network which can serve as a location for a hub for more than 2 wallplates. So secondly, being connected directly to many km of outside line, you need to think about lightning strike transfer potentials from strikes near either end of the route [even if the incoming route is entirely underground], and all of the other interference a long line can bring. Let_Me_Be says the telephone runs in another cable, but it is actually a different pair of wires in the same cable we are talking about. and CAT5 insulation is quite thin. I suppose it is cost benefit. If you think that the cost of replacing fried network hardware [ignoring the possible interference] is outweighed by the cost of not using the existing wiring, then that's the way to do it. While I might share CAT5 cable in an office, this is because the phone lines are not natively external. I wouldn't at home, because this does not apply. Vince
Jim Cunning wrote:
An ordinary Cat5 ethernet connector has 8 contacts (4 pair), but only contacts 1, 2, 3, and 6 are used for ethernet. Contacts 4, 5, 7, and 8 could be used for telephone.
Except when used for gigabit, which requires all 4 pairs.
On Sun, 2004-04-18 at 14:05, James Knott wrote:
Except when used for gigabit, which requires all 4 pairs.
BTW, now that gigabit 5 port switches have gone under 100 euros <http://www.achetezfacile.com/s/produits/74309.html> and that lots of motherboard include gigabit cards, do you know if CAT 5E cables are ok (mine have "FTP CAT 5E verified for gigabit ethernet" but that might be markering :)? Anyone has any experience to relate in setting up a small scale gigabit network: kernel driver problems, effective measured performance, switch performance or reliability, ...? Laurent
Anyone has any experience to relate in setting up a small scale gigabit network: kernel driver problems, effective measured performance, switch performance or reliability, ...?
Yep... I can say, stay away from ANY NIC's that use the RTL-8169 chip! They can't keep up since they don't have any on-board processing. Everything is made in the computer's CPU, and that in turn gives you heave congestion problems! Anders.
On Sunday 18 April 2004 14:43, Anders Norrbring wrote:
Yep... I can say, stay away from ANY NIC's that use the RTL-8169 chip! They can't keep up since they don't have any on-board processing. Everything is made in the computer's CPU, and that in turn gives you heave congestion problems!
I've been bothered by these software based network cards for a long time - isn't software modems enough proof that it's a bad idea? Anyway, what controllers would you recommend that are fully hardware based? Thanks -- Kind regards Hans du Plooy Newington Consulting Services hansdp at newingtoncs dot co dot za
On Sunday 18 April 2004 14:43, Anders Norrbring wrote:
Yep... I can say, stay away from ANY NIC's that use the RTL-8169 chip! They can't keep up since they don't have any on-board processing. Everything is made in the computer's CPU, and that in turn gives you heave congestion problems!
I've been bothered by these software based network cards for a long time - isn't software modems enough proof that it's a bad idea?
Anyway, what controllers would you recommend that are fully hardware based?
I can't say for sure, but I have very good experiencies from 3Com's NIC's, both 100Mb/s and gigabit cards. Anders.
My local group recommended simply looking for REalTek chipsets in unbranded cards. so far no problems. Just find a smart dealer or one who will let you check the cards. CWSIV
On Sun, 2004-04-18 at 14:43, Anders Norrbring wrote:
Yep... I can say, stay away from ANY NIC's that use the RTL-8169 chip! They can't keep up since they don't have any on-board processing. Everything is made in the computer's CPU, and that in turn gives you heave congestion problems!
Well for home, one of the use I can think of is moving data faster to the backup machine, since current disks get 30 to 50 MB/s that's all I would ask from the gigabit card even if it takes some CPU. Do you have any measurement for different cards? Laurent
On Sun, 2004-04-18 at 14:43, Anders Norrbring wrote:
Yep... I can say, stay away from ANY NIC's that use the RTL-8169 chip! They can't keep up since they don't have any on-board processing. Everything is made in the computer's CPU, and that in turn gives you heave congestion problems!
Well for home, one of the use I can think of is moving data faster to the backup machine, since current disks get 30 to 50 MB/s that's all I would ask from the gigabit card even if it takes some CPU. Do you have any measurement for different cards?
No, actually I don't... But with a RTL-8169 based card, continuous load (like backups) and large file copying my transfer rate dropped to a measly 10-20 kbit/s, when I swapped it for a 3Com card I have a rate close to 980 kbit/s with low load on the rest of the network. Anders.
On Sun, 2004-04-18 at 16:18, Anders Norrbring wrote:
No, actually I don't... But with a RTL-8169 based card, continuous load (like backups) and large file copying my transfer rate dropped to a measly 10-20 kbit/s, when I swapped it for a 3Com card I have a rate close to 980 kbit/s with low load on the rest of the network.
I poked around AMD64 motherboard with integrated gigabit and found the following chips: RealTek RTL8110S 3Com 3C940 Gigabit Marvel Gigabit (ASUS K8V) Are they supported by SuSE 9.1 and what are their respective merit? Laurent
On Sun, 2004-04-18 at 16:18, Anders Norrbring wrote:
No, actually I don't... But with a RTL-8169 based card, continuous load (like backups) and large file copying my transfer rate dropped to a measly 10-20 kbit/s, when I swapped it for a 3Com card I have a rate close to 980 kbit/s with low load on the rest of the network.
I poked around AMD64 motherboard with integrated gigabit and found the following chips:
RealTek RTL8110S 3Com 3C940 Gigabit Marvel Gigabit (ASUS K8V)
Are they supported by SuSE 9.1 and what are their respective merit?
I can only answer for the 3C940 chip (It's nominated as 3C2000 when it's a stand alone card) and it's got support for almost every O/S you can find. Look at www.3com.com and search for the 3C2000. Great card! Anders.
söndag 18 april 2004 22:55 skrev Anders Norrbring:
I poked around AMD64 motherboard with integrated gigabit and found the following chips:
RealTek RTL8110S 3Com 3C940 Gigabit Marvel Gigabit (ASUS K8V)
Are they supported by SuSE 9.1 and what are their respective merit?
I can only answer for the 3C940 chip (It's nominated as 3C2000 when it's a stand alone card) and it's got support for almost every O/S you can find. Look at www.3com.com and search for the 3C2000. Great card!
I'm currently using MSI K8T Neo motherboard, which has the RealTek RTL 8110S installed. And I have re-installed SuSE 9.0, as 64bit. The card is working fine, but I haven't put it under any load test, to find out what occurs under heavy load. The driver for it, is a part of the kernel and goes under the name of r8169, and is available both for 2.4 and 2.6 kernels.
participants (13)
-
Anders Norrbring -
Bruce Marshall -
Carl William Spitzer IV -
Damon Jebb -
Hans du Plooy -
James Knott -
Jerome R. Westrick -
Jim Cunning -
Laurent GUERBY -
Let_Me_Be -
Stephen W -
Vince Littler -
Örn Hansen