Switch and networking thread

Recommend me a good network switch for home, I need it for 2-3 devices, so 4-8 port ones are what I am aiming for.
The main thing I want is that it's power consumption is the lowest possible(for reasonable price)
Gigabit one of course

Other urls found in this thread:

amazon.com/gp/product/B000FNFSPY/ref=ox_sc_act_title_2?smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER&psc=1
wikidevi.com/wiki/ASUS_RT-AC1200GP
broadcom.com/products/ethernet-connectivity/switching/roboswitch/bcm53125/
amazon.com/NETGEAR-Wi-Fi-Extender-Essentials-EX2700/dp/B00L0YLRUW/ref=sr_1_3?s=pc&ie=UTF8&qid=1506973395&sr=1-3&keywords=wifi extender
monoprice.com/product?c_id=105&cp_id=10521&cs_id=1052104&p_id=15762&seq=1&format=2
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

And I don't need any extra features, like poe or firewall etc, just some reliable, cheap and low power gigabit switch

amazon.com/gp/product/B000FNFSPY/ref=ox_sc_act_title_2?smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER&psc=1

Any other answer is the wrong answer.

whats the point of netgear switches vs those uber cheap tplink ones. like 10$ for a 5 port gigabit switch

not gigabit
I don't know, I picked the pic of the first one in my local store

theres a button right there for switching to gigabit you retard

oh, sorry. I didn't checked out the amazon page, just searched it's product number in local stores.
Looks good, just what I want

Netgear GS108v4
>just werks
>lifetime warranty on switch

...

Juniper EX9214

Netgear usually has flow control, only utilizing ports in use.

Just buy a v4 or v5 netgear and you will be set.

just bought a
Netgear R6400-100NAS, Wireless-AC1750. any recs on a decent modem?

I have one of these. No complaints, although not sure how shitty a switch has to be for one to notice it.

I like this meme.

Does that even make a difference? I mean netgear stuff all seems pretty rigid whereas tplink has a lot of consumer end stuff.

>lifetime warranty on switch
Not the power adapter, which is what always dies anyway. Netgear is a fucking disgusting vendor to deal with if you ever need support.

Gigabit dumb switches are all the same now. Just buy something cheap with good reviews. 8 port is usually a better value than 5.

>Unmanaged
Fuck off

What does managed switch means? What can I do with them

Just waiting for pic related.

Short answer: vlans

Just fill up a server with 4 port ethernet cards, that's what I use as my main switch

i was originally looking for a unmanaged switch but i remeber seeing a FOSS switch OS somewhere

it was maybe embedded linux

anyone got the github?

I have one of those as well, it's been solid. It only really has 2 ports with high traffic though, the rest is mostly idle.

>You will never be an unmanaged switch

I like being a managed sub.

Um... OpenSwitch?

>tfw got a 24 port unmanaged gigabit switch for free

They do basically everything a router can do, but one step lower on the protocol stack. They're useful if you want to ensure one Ethernet network segment cannot talk to another while still accessing the same external resources. As you might want for networks with outdated/insecure devices that still need network access, or Internet connection sharing for multiple renters.

Capabilities differ significantly between different models just like routers.

But I want my computers to talk to each other

or (assuming you mean pvlan) separating services that don't need to communicated directly with one another for increased security
or separating networks without requiring another switch, also connecting those networks with tagged ports
link aggregation is a nice feature as well if you for instance run a backup server that performs concurrent backups to multiple hosts on the network, or a SAN/NAS.
bandwidth limiting is another nice feature if its a backbone switch behind customers' connections.
stacking switches is also a thing
managed switches also tend to have better STP
there are a lot of use cases even without going to L3

and most importantly, increased security is not just relevant when dealing with outdated devices.
for maximum security you should always consider the worst thing a device could possibly do

tplink, seriously, out of all fucking brands?
might as well go straight for dlink

May I ask advice about creating VLANS with subnetting? I think I can't or my router won't do it by port.

vlans are l2, subnets are l3
make vlans first then think about subnets
if your router can't do it throw it in the trash and get pfsense or a small business firewall

I think I'm missing it the option actually. My router is an Asus 1200G+. I just want two VLANs since I want to put apart a device with his own IP to the internet. Am I wrong wanting a VLAN for it?

You confuse vlans with public IP I believe.
Just setup PAT to that one host on your public ip

I got a GS108Ev3 recently. I like it a lot because I haven't thought about it.

> Asus 1200G+
wikidevi.com/wiki/ASUS_RT-AC1200GP
-> broadcom.com/products/ethernet-connectivity/switching/roboswitch/bcm53125/

You'd need a smart switch to create vlans with that router. Pretty much all consumer routers have two logical Ethernet connections with one soldered to a 5 port dumb switch chip.

TPLink's cheap, unmanaged gigabit switches are all you need in this scenario. So long as your network doesn't have a shitload of MAC addresses you'll be fine. I've got two of these things in my infrastructure and have never had an issue with either.

If you have your own routable subnet you could set up a different LAN on your router on different ports (no VLAN required). If you want to receive an address by DHCP from your ISP and have that host unsecured outside your firewall, your best bet would be a switch on the WAN side of your firewall or a bridge between the WAN port and another port (basically a virtual switch).
If you want to keep it in a different LAN and just use PAT like said to open for certain services through your router's public address then you only need to set up a separate LAN on your router.
However if you want to carry through separate L2 networks through one port and all your hosts (or a switch further out in your network) are VLAN aware you may want to look into VLANs. You'd basically be running tagged vlans over that one port and then separating it on a per-host level or assigning each of the VLANs to specific ports on your managed switch.

To add to this, if what is saying is true you're sort of shit out of luck, and you're going to need a managed switch somewhere.
I've little to no experience with consumer firewalls.

Also I paid $40 for it. Don't pay more.

Ok maybe I'm explainning myself really bad. English is not my 1st language. Sorry.

I want to run a Tor Non-Exit Relay. At same time I love to seed torrents. I believe this are likely opposite.

I've been told if I connect 2 Ethernet port form different devices they should have different public address, right?

In case that's true, I also want to isolate the Tor itself in its own VLAN so it can't see anything on the net but the router.

How wrong am I?

I will check that a little later, have to brb

>In case that's true, I also want to isolate the Tor itself in its own VLAN so it can't see anything on the net but the router.
You don't need VLANs for that, just separate LANs. However for a separate public address you'd either have to have access to that from your ISP, for instance if you're in a /29 network you could use 1:1 NAT or just have your Tor relay sitting unprotected on the edge.

>I connect 2 Ethernet port form different devices they should have different public address, right?
Not for IPv4, no. Physical Ethernet ports and public IP addresses in general are not strictly related.

> I also want to isolate the Tor itself in its own VLAN so it can't see anything on the net but the router
You shouldn't have to worry about TOR interacting with your LAN in any case. Unless you're afraid of state actor black magic, in which case you want a completely different Internet connection.

Also is the same as a VLAN for TOR purposes.

>Also (You) is the same as a VLAN for TOR purposes.
No. VLAN is a specific technology.

can someone help me out

I need to extend the range of my wireless router. Can this be done using a spare laptop? if not, what do I need to buy?

You can, but it will likely suck. Ideally you want to have copper going to the locations where you want your access points and then cluster them so that they act as a single AP, by automatically having your device connect to the AP with the best signal, essentially oblivious to the fact that you have multiple physical APs

>tp link

enjoy your tinnitus inducing power supply brick

At the price they sell them you can just buy a new brick and still get it cheaper then other brands.

You Americans must be getting different power supplies.

Pretty sure they just have inferior standards when it comes to power bricks.

I have one of these, only complaint I have is that vlan1 has all ports as untagged by default and you can't modify this behaviour

Is microTIK any good mah man?

Wait so you have a switch that doesn't know how redirect traffic?

Microtik is pretty good.
But expensive as hell.

Burger here; have one of which came free with an Archer C5. No power brick problems with either for several years.

thanks man!
wasnt expecting a legit answer.

if I were to use my laptop, whats the process called? Internet sharing? something else?

or should I get something like this:

amazon.com/NETGEAR-Wi-Fi-Extender-Essentials-EX2700/dp/B00L0YLRUW/ref=sr_1_3?s=pc&ie=UTF8&qid=1506973395&sr=1-3&keywords=wifi extender

I'm debating this with the friend that told me about the topic. I have to apologize since he told me "different IPv4" not different public address, which seems to be non-relevant for the services.

He defends something as said. But I'm not worried about TOR I'm worrying about the torrent services seeing my lan or seeing the other hardware I have. He says the torrent protocol can only check ports and nothing more. Is he right?

Also, thank you for helping an user out. I'm still here reading.

Just checked the hAP.

45 buckaroos is not that 'spensive breh

Netgear a shit

Just get a TP-Link. I've had zero products from them die on me or perform like shit, can't say the same for Netgear. Just werks.

It's called bridging. If you want something less painful and cheap though you'd better buy something like that range extender. It's going to be better than anything you can do with the laptop anyway, without equipment that likely ends up costing more than one of those things.
However, if you want a rock solid business-grade network, go for my multiple-AP solution. It's not cheap, though.

so it's possible to do this bridging with a laptop with a single wireless card? I thought this only works if the laptop has a ethernet connection and is shared through the wireless card. It's possible to do wireless both ways?

I thought you meant taking an ethernet connection and setting up your laptop as an AP.
I've never tried to do what you're describing, but I'd imagine it's possible with the right software.
Your best bet is to google-fu that or wait for someone who's tried to reply here.

However regardless of what solution you get that does what you're thinking of it won't be seamless like an actual cluster.

>Recommend me a good network switch for home
What do you actually want to do with it though?
If you just want a box to plug all your shit into to work just buy any unmanaged TP-Link or Netgear switch, gigabit or not depends how your house is wired.

Managed switches are a whole different ball game.

>100 mbit router
>45$
>Cheap

Pick one.

no, it just means all ports have access to the web/java interface

it's a really minor complaint

If you don't need a managed switch, I've been happy with my 8 port monoprice switch, and there's a 5 port version too.

monoprice.com/product?c_id=105&cp_id=10521&cs_id=1052104&p_id=15762&seq=1&format=2

Oh sorry I thought you mean they weren't flagged under as VLAN 1.

>people pretending to know shit about networking

As a network admin this thread is a real cringefest.

It can definitely matter if you're shoving a ton of traffic over it, or something that has pretty sensitive traffic like VOIP. For anything you're doing at home, though, not really.

An unmanaged switch is a switch you just plug in and go. You can't do any config to it. You can probably do the same with a managed switch, but you also have the option of configuring all its layer 2 shit as well.

As a network tecnician, I declare that all threads about network's in Sup Forums are often lacking in context and therefore the posts seem nonsensical at best.

What? No. VLANs are definitely a layer 3 thing if only because you have to give a VLAN its own subnet for it to work and communication between VLANs requires a router (or L3 switch.)

Switches CAN do VLAN stuff, but that is primarily relating to directing traffic for specific VLANs out of specific ports as well as dealing with trunking.

Except you don't. VLANs are strictly layer 2. Please don't talk about things you don't know about.

>Layer 2

>But won't work without a router.

VLAN tagging takes place on L2, but as far as pretty much any device is aware of, they are all on different networks, which makes it part of L3.

Joke's on you I already have tinnitus!

Layer 3-wise they do not have to be on different networks. You could have the same subnet on different VLANs. Doesn't make much sense in most cases, but it's possible.

So it doesn't change the fact that VLANs are strictly layer 2.

Then why do you come to Sup Forums?

Enlighten us then, please. Some ones want to learn.

gotcha, thanks. Think I'm just gonna buy one of those range extenders on amazon.

I spent like an hour digging around the arch wiki trying to set it up and couldn't find anything suggesting it's even possible to bridge wirelessly both ways. If anyone knows please help

Why are some ITT shitting on d-link? I have several 4-8 port switches that have been working perfectly for years.

teach me your secrets Sup Forums

> nocodes think 80% of all posts on Sup Forums aren't like this

>I need to get an XYZ equipment for my Thingamabob
>There's 600 variations applicable to his request because purpose was not said.

It's different from coding requests.

Personal experience.

From 2007 to 2011 I got three 24 ports Dlinks, all three of them got dead ports for at least 1/3 of them
Currently using three Gigabit TP links, still got no problem.
All three of them connected to my main router Linksys with Link Aggregation.

>There's 600 variations applicable to his request because purpose was not said.
there's only one variation of a switch you'll need as a home user
the cheapest one with enough ports that won't break down within a couple years

What is the point? just connect them directly to the router.

100mpbs lol

There's a lot of stuff I wouldn't trust D-Link to do, but 8 port unmanaged switches are so commodified it would actually cost more to build them wrong.

>the cheapest one with enough ports that won't break down within a couple years
IE: the used 48 port Enterprise switch that's being sold for $40 on ebay.

...

>48 port
no need to get more than eight if you only plug in three devices
>used Enterprise
shit tier power consumption
every additional 10W over the course of a year cost as much as the purchase price of the switch he actually needs
which brings us to
>$40
twice as much as necessary

And yet again you missed the whole point.

>OpenSwitch
Does this work?
This would seem like something that would introduce too much latency.

Do you want to go deaf?

>Any other answer is the wrong answer.
says the faggot with the shittiest answer in the thread.

Edgerouter X

Ignore all the tards here.