Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #177296 > unrolled thread

Advice / recommendations on Inexpensive Managed Ethernet Switches

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  Advice / recommendations on Inexpensive Managed Ethernet Switches rhkramer@gmail.com - 2017-02-02 17:30 +0100
    Re: Advice / recommendations on Inexpensive Managed Ethernet Switches Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2017-02-02 18:00 +0100
    Re: Advice / recommendations on Inexpensive Managed Ethernet Switches Eike Lantzsch <zp6cge@gmx.net> - 2017-02-03 21:30 +0100
      Re: Advice / recommendations on Inexpensive Managed Ethernet Switches <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2017-02-04 11:00 +0100
        Re: Advice / recommendations on Inexpensive Managed Ethernet Switches Mark Fletcher <mark27q1@gmail.com> - 2017-02-04 11:50 +0100
          Re: Advice / recommendations on Inexpensive Managed Ethernet Switches <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2017-02-05 11:10 +0100
            Update: My current intentRe: Advice / recommendations on Inexpensive Managed Ethernet Switches rhkramer@gmail.com - 2017-02-05 18:00 +0100
              Re: Update: My current intentRe: Advice / recommendations on  Inexpensive Managed Ethernet Switches <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2017-02-05 19:10 +0100
                Re: Update: My current intentRe: Advice / recommendations on Inexpensive Managed Ethernet Switches deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2017-02-06 21:00 +0100
              Re: Update: My current intentRe: Advice / recommendations on Inexpensive Managed Ethernet Switches rhkramer@gmail.com - 2017-02-06 16:00 +0100
              Re: Update: My current intentRe: Advice / recommendations on  Inexpensive Managed Ethernet Switches Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2017-02-06 17:00 +0100
                Re: Update: My current intentRe: Advice / recommendations on Inexpensive Managed Ethernet Switches rhkramer@gmail.com - 2017-02-06 20:20 +0100
      Re: Advice / recommendations on Inexpensive Managed Ethernet Switches deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2017-02-05 19:40 +0100
    Re: Advice / recommendations on Inexpensive Managed Ethernet Switches solitone <solitone@mail.com> - 2017-02-04 15:50 +0100
      Re: Advice / recommendations on Inexpensive Managed Ethernet Switches rhkramer@gmail.com - 2017-02-04 17:40 +0100
    Re: Advice / recommendations on Inexpensive Managed Ethernet Switches solitone <solitone@mail.com> - 2017-02-04 16:40 +0100
      Re: Advice / recommendations on Inexpensive Managed Ethernet Switches Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2017-02-04 17:10 +0100
        Re: Advice / recommendations on Inexpensive Managed Ethernet Switches solitone <solitone@mail.com> - 2017-02-04 17:50 +0100

#177296 — Advice / recommendations on Inexpensive Managed Ethernet Switches

I'm sending this to the Debian user list first, even though it is probably 
somewhat OT.

Background: Recently I started monitoring how many packets are going through 
my LAN to my ISP (Earthlink (DSL)).  I have (or maybe had) some thought about 
considering a switch to HughesNet satelite service, which has some low limits 
(before slowdown) on how many bytes you can download per month (without 
looking, I think the limits are like 5, 10, and 15 GB).

Aside: I am actually gobsmacked (I don't think I've ever been gobsmacked 
before ;-)--in a week of monitoring, we (my son and I, but with my son gone 8 
to 12 hours a day) are downloading 1.5 to 4 GB *per day* (and uploading 100 to 
300 MB *per day*).

Anyway, I want to try to figure out where all this data is going to and coming 
from, at least in terms of the devices we have on our LAN (I'll discuss those 
below), so I'm thinking that a(n inexpensive) managed (Ethernet) switch or two 
(discussed below) might help me do that.

Just so you know, I've never used a managed Ethernet switch, nor read much 
about them.

One thing I want to do is implement QOS--we have two ObiHai VOIP devices 
(which we use pretty rarely, but still want to keep--they might be used for 4 
calls / 10 to 30 minutes a week).  Sometimes the conversation gets pretty 
choppy, probably depending on what my son is doing at the time (I mean, like 
watching a video or something), so I'm hoping that QOS would improve that 
(assuming the packets from the ObiHai device can be recognized--I would think 
they can based on their (private / on the LAN) IP addresses.

Like I mentioned above, the other thing I want to do is start monitoring (at 
least on an occasional / diagnostic basis) the bandwidth used by each device.  

Layout of the network (for background):

The Earthlink DSL modem (Westell) is followed by an Ethernet (unmanaged} 
switch.  

From that switch there are three cables:

   * One to a WiFi hotspot that is almost always on (but only used by my son 
playing games while watching TV)
   
   * One to my desk where there are two desktop computers (one Wheezy, one 
Jessie), an ObiHai device, and a WiFi hotspot that I turn on only very rarely 
(if I need to download something to my phone or similar).  (There is an 
unmanaged Ethernet switch here to connect the various devices.)
   
   * One to my son's desk where there are two computers--a desktop with 
Jessie, and a Windows laptop, and another ObiHai device.  (There is an 
unmanaged Ethernet switch here to connect the various devices.)
   
My first thought is that with a second managed switch, I'd plug it in place of 
(or after) one of the unmanaged switches at a desktop to monitor data flows in 
those areas for a few days or so.

However, not having ever used a managed switch, I don't know how smart they 
are.  For example, from the one managed switch just after the Westell modem, 
maybe I can monitor the flows to individual devices, either one at a time or 
all at once?

I see managed 5-port gigabit switches on eBay starting at a little under $30, 
and I'd like to stay close to that as a budget (i.e., ~$60 for 2).  Of course, 
if a more featureful switch can monitor the data flows to each device from that 
(central) location, I could spend that ~$60 for the more featureful switch).  
(But there is some value to me to have two managed switches such that one 
would serve as a spare for the central one even if being used at other 
locations for monitoring.)

Advice / comments / recommendations?

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#177298

On Thu, Feb 02, 2017 at 11:19:59AM -0500, rhkramer@gmail.com wrote:
> Aside: I am actually gobsmacked (I don't think I've ever been gobsmacked 
> before ;-)--in a week of monitoring, we (my son and I, but with my son gone 8 
> to 12 hours a day) are downloading 1.5 to 4 GB *per day* (and uploading 100 to 
> 300 MB *per day*).
> 
> Anyway, I want to try to figure out where all this data is going to and coming 
> from, at least in terms of the devices we have on our LAN (I'll discuss those 
> below), so I'm thinking that a(n inexpensive) managed (Ethernet) switch or two 
> (discussed below) might help me do that.

I think you actually want a smart router. A Debian box with two
or more network interfaces can be such a thing.

> One thing I want to do is implement QOS--we have two ObiHai VOIP devices 
> (which we use pretty rarely, but still want to keep--they might be used for 4 
> calls / 10 to 30 minutes a week).  Sometimes the conversation gets pretty 
> choppy, probably depending on what my son is doing at the time (I mean, like 
> watching a video or something), so I'm hoping that QOS would improve that 
> (assuming the packets from the ObiHai device can be recognized--I would think 
> they can based on their (private / on the LAN) IP addresses.

A router can do that better than a switch can.

> Like I mentioned above, the other thing I want to do is start monitoring (at 
> least on an occasional / diagnostic basis) the bandwidth used by each device.  

Depending on exactly what you want, either a switch or a router
can help here.

> Layout of the network (for background):
> 
> The Earthlink DSL modem (Westell) is followed by an Ethernet (unmanaged} 
> switch.  

You would want to put your router in between these. If you can
arrange a third network interface on the router, you could
connect the WiFi hotspot to the router, as well.

> I see managed 5-port gigabit switches on eBay starting at a little under $30, 
> and I'd like to stay close to that as a budget (i.e., ~$60 for 2).  Of course, 
> if a more featureful switch can monitor the data flows to each device from that 
> (central) location, I could spend that ~$60 for the more featureful switch).  
> (But there is some value to me to have two managed switches such that one 
> would serve as a spare for the central one even if being used at other 
> locations for monitoring.)
> 
> Advice / comments / recommendations?

That seems an unlikely price point, even for used equipment on
ebay. And managed switches usually have a minimum of 12 ports,
not 5. (12, 16, 24, 32 and 48 are all common)

I would recommend putting in a Debian box between the DSL modem
and the ethernet switch. You will need to learn a little about
routing and IP masquerading / NAT, and you will want to set up
firewalling with iptables.

You can look at traffic in realtime with iftop, which will show
you graphs of the top users by IP address or domain name and
where they are connecting.

You can set individual traffic counters per IP address or per 
service or both with iptables.

What you won't get is flow information between local devices, 
but as I understand it you are more concerned about traffic
in/out to the Internet at large.

If you set fq_codel as the queue discipline on the interfaces
to the router, you will probably solve most of your traffic
interference problems without mucking with QoS.

-dsr-

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#177354

On Thursday, 2 February 2017 11:19:59 PYST rhkramer@gmail.com wrote:
> I'm sending this to the Debian user list first, even though it is probably
> somewhat OT.
> 
> Background: Recently I started monitoring how many packets are going through
> my LAN to my ISP (Earthlink (DSL)).  I have (or maybe had) some thought
> about considering a switch to HughesNet satelite service, which has some
> low limits (before slowdown) on how many bytes you can download per month
> (without looking, I think the limits are like 5, 10, and 15 GB).
> 
Excuse me please for writing this on a Debian list, but ... I see the flame war 
coming ...

I'm using this board
http://www.pcengines.ch/apu1d.htm

and this operating system
https://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq6.html#Setup

building a router
https://www.openbsd.org/faq/pf/example1.html

and then there are these good books
https://www.nostarch.com/pf3
https://www.nostarch.com/obenbsd2e

I'm a fan of Debian but everything has its use case and I found that OpenBSD 
is far safer and far more straight forward, better documented and better 
maintained  than any Linux distribution ever can be. Linux has another focus, 
which is far wider. OpenBSD limits itself. Mind you: I'm only talking about 
this use case. And yes, there is a certain learning curve. How steep it is 
depends on how versed you are with networks - but then I think that also 
applies to Debian if you set your face on setting up your own router, firewall 
and network flow analyzer. With Debian it will be easier to shoot yourself into 
your knee IMHO.

But you are the judge.

Cheers
Eike

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#177379

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Fri, Feb 03, 2017 at 05:21:30PM -0300, Eike Lantzsch wrote:
> On Thursday, 2 February 2017 11:19:59 PYST rhkramer@gmail.com wrote:
> > I'm sending this to the Debian user list first, even though it is probably
> > somewhat OT.
> > 
> > Background: Recently I started monitoring how many packets are going through
> > my LAN to my ISP (Earthlink (DSL)).  I have (or maybe had) some thought
> > about considering a switch to HughesNet satelite service, which has some
> > low limits (before slowdown) on how many bytes you can download per month
> > (without looking, I think the limits are like 5, 10, and 15 GB).
> > 
> Excuse me please for writing this on a Debian list, but ... I see the flame war 
> coming ...

Not from me. OpenBSD is free software, and while some might see me as GNU
zealot, free software is -- um -- free, and that is a Good Thing.

Technically, BSD is a very respectable choice too and a community to which
we, the Debian community owe a lot, especially in the realm of networking.
Just think SSH for one prominent (but not the only) example.

On the contrary: I'd be ready to flame back. But I don't think anyone here
would be willing to go beyond a little candle :)

- -- t
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAliVpWIACgkQBcgs9XrR2kZjjQCeLgWjphoALR5V0UQoyfaCpaX2
McAAn2CGOz4ZT9tTjuIXTiGPAZlCqTJa
=W1gn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#177382

On Sat, Feb 04, 2017 at 10:56:50AM +0100, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> 
> On the contrary: I'd be ready to flame back. But I don't think anyone here
> would be willing to go beyond a little candle :)
> 
That gives me the mental picture of a "candle-war" -- 

"I think you are not completely correct!"

"Well, I think you are not quite thinking about the problem the right way!"

...

Mark

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#177438

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Sat, Feb 04, 2017 at 07:46:16PM +0900, Mark Fletcher wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 04, 2017 at 10:56:50AM +0100, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> > 
> > On the contrary: I'd be ready to flame back. But I don't think anyone here
> > would be willing to go beyond a little candle :)
> > 
> That gives me the mental picture of a "candle-war" -- 
> 
> "I think you are not completely correct!"
> 
> "Well, I think you are not quite thinking about the problem the right way!"

ROFL, thanks for this one :-)

- -- t
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAliW+SsACgkQBcgs9XrR2kY1XwCfVNuSWdGZSaULibjIqZqV3TDT
XlMAn3WEG6HWcOUCQ2YgB65B55MF473x
=Ts+C
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#177457 — Update: My current intentRe: Advice / recommendations on Inexpensive Managed Ethernet Switches

I am the OP, I want to thank everyone for their comments.

I think I've decided to buy an inexpensive router instead of a switch, and, in 
fact, I think I'll go with a Ubiquiti ER-X 256MB Storage 5 Gigabit RJ45 ports.  
My reasoning includes considering these points:

   * There is at least a question about a GPL issue / violation.  IIUC, this 
has to do with a program named uboot, for which, at least at one time, 
Ubiquiti may not have provided the modified source code.  The references that I 
could find online dated from 2012 through about 2015 (668 days from yesterday 
;-), and it seems that Ubiquiti, at least, seems to think they are now in 
compliance.  (see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9331512)

   * The router is (as, iirc, Dan Weber mentioned) more featureful (than a 
smart switch), and, apparently I'll be able to both measure bandwidth / traffic 
to each device on my LAN (from one central location), and then consider 
blocking some of that traffic should I determine that it is superfluous in some 
way.

   * The device amounts to a small Linux (in fact, Debian) based box, with, 
iirc, a dual core processor, 256 MB each of RAM and NAND, and 5 Ethernet 
ports.  I figure I can do some playing with this to learn more modern 
networking memes.  One surprise to me (which is not relevant to me at this 
point, but, apparently if you get certain types of cable TV (maybe IPTV, 
iirc), the ISPs either require or suggest that, if you also get Internet 
service (from them??), that you create a separate VLAN(s?) for at least one of 
the services.

   * The forums on the unbt site seem like a good source of help.  I found one 
link that gives me a very simple setup that I can use to start, and then build 
from there.  (see https://help.ubnt.com/hc/en-us/articles/115002531728-
EdgeRouter-Beginners-Guide-to-EdgeRouter, and https://help.ubnt.com/hc/en-
us/categories/200321064-EdgeMAX (these are from the Help Center, not the 
Forum).

Again, I welcome any further comments.  

I am watching a used Ubiquiti Edgerouter ER-3 Lite and if the price stays low 
enough, I may go that way.  But, the 300,000 packet/ second capability of the 
ER-X should be sufficient for my needs, and probably keep up with my Earthlink 
DSL link ;-)  (I'm pretty sure I won't need the 1,000,000 packet/ second 
capability of the ER-3 Lite.)

I hope I don't sound like a shill for Ubiquiti.  If I do go this way, sometime 
in the future I'll provide one or more updates on the status...

PS: Now I have to wonder (after this long screed) if tomas is still ROFL ;-)

PPS: Sometimes I find some of their writings ambiguous or confusing.  As a (not 
completely accurate example), they use the term bridging at various times.  
I've run the DSL modem in bridged mode at various times for various reasons, 
but the statements I found seemed to be talking about bridging on the output 
of the router, but that is not 100% clear to me.  I guess that might be one of 
the things I might learn (if there is any reason to consider bridging 
downstream from the smart router).

Thanks again!


On Sunday, February 05, 2017 05:06:35 AM tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> ROFL, thanks for this one :-)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#177462 — Re: Update: My current intentRe: Advice / recommendations on Inexpensive Managed Ethernet Switches

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Sun, Feb 05, 2017 at 11:54:35AM -0500, rhkramer@gmail.com wrote:
> I am the OP, I want to thank everyone for their comments.

Thanks, very informative (esp. the ycombinator link).

> PS: Now I have to wonder (after this long screed) if tomas is still ROFL ;-)

I recovered, but still: thanks for the good humour :)

regards
- -- t
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAliXah4ACgkQBcgs9XrR2kbxdwCdH626AIYlp0xCSkvPTVwPAl+T
tfUAoIBxo+F3IU0ATqgHE7P2e9IPKubn
=8qkT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#177500 — Re: Update: My current intentRe: Advice / recommendations on Inexpensive Managed Ethernet Switches

tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:

> Thanks, very informative (esp. the ycombinator link).

which reminds me of those two cases
RHEL https://lwn.net/Articles/432012/
GRSec https://lwn.net/Articles/655721/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#177481 — Re: Update: My current intentRe: Advice / recommendations on Inexpensive Managed Ethernet Switches

Oops, I really got those names confused:

   * The person that mentioned that a router would be able to measure 
bandwidth / traffic to each device on my LAN was Dan Ritter.

   * The Dan Weber's name is really Bob Weber.

Apologies to you both, I really should have gone back and re-read the original 
email.

On Sunday, February 05, 2017 11:54:35 AM rhkramer@gmail.com wrote:
>    * The router is (as, iirc, Dan Weber mentioned) more featureful (than a




> smart switch), and, apparently I'll be able to both measure bandwidth /
> traffic to each device on my LAN (from one central location), and then
> consider blocking some of that traffic should I determine that it is
> superfluous in some way.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#177484 — Re: Update: My current intentRe: Advice / recommendations on Inexpensive Managed Ethernet Switches

On Sun, Feb 05, 2017 at 11:54:35AM -0500, rhkramer@gmail.com wrote:
> I am the OP, I want to thank everyone for their comments.
> 
> I think I've decided to buy an inexpensive router instead of a switch, and, in 
> fact, I think I'll go with a Ubiquiti ER-X 256MB Storage 5 Gigabit RJ45 ports.  
> My reasoning includes considering these points:
> 
>    * There is at least a question about a GPL issue / violation.  IIUC, this 
> has to do with a program named uboot, for which, at least at one time, 
> Ubiquiti may not have provided the modified source code.  The references that I 
> could find online dated from 2012 through about 2015 (668 days from yesterday 
> ;-), and it seems that Ubiquiti, at least, seems to think they are now in 
> compliance.  (see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9331512)

uboot is similar to grub or lilo.

If you read carefully, you'll discover that LibertyBSD's
complaints have not been addressed: Ubiquiti will ship you
some source code, but not what's needed to build a booting
system of your own.


>    * The device amounts to a small Linux (in fact, Debian) based box, with, 

It's based on Debian 6, and modified in ways which prevent you
from upgrading further - at least the kernel and boot system.

-dsr-

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#177499 — Re: Update: My current intentRe: Advice / recommendations on Inexpensive Managed Ethernet Switches

On Monday, February 06, 2017 10:49:53 AM Dan Ritter wrote:
> If you read carefully, you'll discover that LibertyBSD's
> complaints have not been addressed: Ubiquiti will ship you
> some source code, but not what's needed to build a booting
> system of your own.

Thanks, it was a pain to try to read and understand.  

> >    * The device amounts to a small Linux (in fact, Debian) based box,
> >    with,
> 
> It's based on Debian 6, and modified in ways which prevent you
> from upgrading further - at least the kernel and boot system.

Thanks, I guess if it runs and I can use it as a router, I'll be satisfied.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#177463

Eike Lantzsch wrote:

> On Thursday, 2 February 2017 11:19:59 PYST rhkramer@gmail.com wrote:
>> I'm sending this to the Debian user list first, even though it is
>> probably somewhat OT.
>> 
>> Background: Recently I started monitoring how many packets are going
>> through
>> my LAN to my ISP (Earthlink (DSL)).  I have (or maybe had) some thought
>> about considering a switch to HughesNet satelite service, which has some
>> low limits (before slowdown) on how many bytes you can download per month
>> (without looking, I think the limits are like 5, 10, and 15 GB).
>> 
> Excuse me please for writing this on a Debian list, but ... I see the
> flame war coming ...
> 
> I'm using this board
> http://www.pcengines.ch/apu1d.htm
> 

I am using similar board to build a router but with debian minimal
installation. The setup is as follows

telco
modem -(wired/DMZ)-> debian(router/firewall) -> switch (unmgd) -> network0
  |                          |
  |                          +-> switch (unmgd) -> network1
  +-> wireless

The advantage here is that all wireless are outside the firewall. In your
case it would be

telco
modem -(wired/DMZ)-> debian(router/firewall) -> switch (unmgd) -> network0
                            |
                            +-> wireless network

and the board suggested will fit the need from the specs

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#177390

On giovedì 2 febbraio 2017 11:19:59 CET rhkramer@gmail.com wrote:
> Layout of the network (for background):
> 
> The Earthlink DSL modem (Westell) is followed by an Ethernet (unmanaged}
> switch.
> 
> From that switch there are three cables:
> 
>    * One to a WiFi hotspot that is almost always on (but only used by my son
> playing games while watching TV)
> 
>    * One to my desk [...] There is
> an unmanaged Ethernet switch here to connect the various devices.
> 
>    * One to my son's desk [...] There is an
> unmanaged Ethernet switch here to connect the various devices.

I'm just curious, but I cannot understand how you can have Internet access 
from all your devices, considering you just have a modem plus some switches, 
but you don't have a router that does Network Address Translation. Perhaps the 
modem is in fact a modem/router combo, rather than a modem-only device?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#177398

On Saturday, February 04, 2017 09:43:13 AM solitone wrote:
> I'm just curious, but I cannot understand how you can have Internet access
> from all your devices, considering you just have a modem plus some
> switches, but you don't have a router that does Network Address
> Translation. Perhaps the modem is in fact a modem/router combo, rather
> than a modem-only device?

Sorry, yes, the modem is a modem/router combo.  And it is from that that I 
currently get the statistics I mentioned (re used bandwidth).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#177394

I take advantage of this thread to ask for advice on this topic. My need is a 
managed switch with Gigabit ports that supports port trunking (Link 
Aggregation Control Protocol, LACP, 802.3ad Dynamic Link Aggregation), to 
increase the bandwith to my Network Access Storage. Is there anything on the 
marketplace that doesn't cost way too much?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#177395

On Sat, Feb 04, 2017 at 04:29:39PM +0100, solitone wrote:
> I take advantage of this thread to ask for advice on this topic. My need is a 
> managed switch with Gigabit ports that supports port trunking (Link 
> Aggregation Control Protocol, LACP, 802.3ad Dynamic Link Aggregation), to 
> increase the bandwith to my Network Access Storage. Is there anything on the 
> marketplace that doesn't cost way too much?

Depending on your usage scenario, maybe you don't need one at
all.

If you have a single Linux box that wants lots of bandwidth to
the NAS, you could do this:

   switch -------- NAS
        |          |||
        ----------Linux box

This shows a NAS and a Linux box with four NICs each. One is
used to connect to the general network via the switch, and
the other three on each device are connected straight across
to the companion.

You would want to set extra IP addresses on each device so that
they can see each other directly through the triple NICs, which
can speak LACP without going through a switch.

If, on the other hand, you have a bunch of potential bandwidth
consumers, yes, you'll need a capable switch.

EBay says that you can get a used Juniper EX2200-24 (24 gigabit
ports) for $110 or so -- that's a great piece of hardware, very
capable,

For about the same price, you can get a used Juniper SRX110h or
SRX220h, which are 8 port firewall/routers: but they can also do
LACP on any set of ports. If you have a small network, that
could be really nice.

-dsr-

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#177402

On sabato 4 febbraio 2017 11:02:12 CET Dan Ritter wrote:
> If, on the other hand, you have a bunch of potential bandwidth
> consumers, yes, you'll need a capable switch.

Yes, this is my scenario.

> EBay says that you can get a used Juniper EX2200-24 (24 gigabit
> ports) for $110 or so -- that's a great piece of hardware, very
> capable,
> 
> For about the same price, you can get a used Juniper SRX110h or
> SRX220h, which are 8 port firewall/routers: but they can also do
> LACP on any set of ports. If you have a small network, that
> could be really nice.

Nice, thanks! SRX220h could be an option, since it has Gigabit eth ports, 
while 110h hasn't. Considering my current router is pretty limited, it might 
be the way to go, rather than a switch. 8 ports would be enough for my home 
LAN.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web