|
||||||||
On Sat, 2004-03-06 at 02:20, Adam Nellemann wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks for all the info HiltonT! > > > The only issue would be the type of switch in use. > > I guess I should make sure to get a 10/100/1000 (or at least a > 100/1000) switch then. Hope this doesn't make them much more expensive! A 10/100/1000 would always be better for adding other devices, than a pure 1000 switch - such as additional PCs that are being used on a temporary basis, routers, etc. > > Gigabit anywhere near current wireless kit is complete and utter > > overkill. The fastest commonly available WiFi protocol is 54Mbps, > > achieving a shared bandwidth of about 30Mbps if you have a homogenous > > 802.11g network. This drops significantly if you have a heterogenous > > 802.11b/802.11g network. The new "Super G" standard of 108Mbps works > > ONLY in a homogenous environment, delivering about 55-60Mbps of shared > > actual throughput. > > The idea was to use Gigabit to my workstation (I'll then have to learn > to live with the cable of course), but preserve the wireless for my > other, less speed craving, machines. Don't you also have a video and power cable to your workstation? What difference will the addition of a network cable make? > Regarding the wireless AP: The reason I asked about this was that I'm > not completely satisfied with my current setup, with a wireless card > on OPT1. As far as I can see, this only gives me about 2Mbps per host! > I assume a dedicated AccessPoint will perform better than that (also > it would give me an excuse for upgrading to G, possibly even Super G, > if I can find the gear!) Don't forget that WiFi is a shared bandwidth solution - like the old network hubs were. This is the reason for the pathetic performance per PC. Remember, this is why we've all moved to switches - way faster throughput. Also, MAKE SURE that all machines on the WiFi network are running the same protocol - all 802.11b or 802.11g, but not a mixture of both. If you have a mixture, use one 802.11b AP and another 802.11g AP as this will increase net throughput. > I guess there would be some advantage in placing the AP on OPT1 > through a 100Mbps NIC, instead of going through the Gigabit switch. Definitely. You can then assign a different network to the WiFi PCs and filter the traffic through the m0n0wall. Also, make sure that you implement WPA security - WEP is a joke, MAC filtering isn't much better, and SSID hiding is not even worth the waste of time to set it up. > > As for Gigabit cards that are supported in m0n0wall, that WOULD be > > interesting as I'm sure many people would be looking this way in the > > foreseeable future for their LAN/DMZ interface, not necessarily for > > their WAN interface (and if anyone DOES have a Gigabit connection to the > > Internet, PLEASE let me know!!!) > > Well, I don't know if they use Gigabit NICs, but I think my brother > has around 4.5Gbps on the job (and thats not even their full > bandwidth, if I remember correctly!) I've seen reports that Intel Gigabit Copper NICs work fine. I'd also have expected this as they have a single driver that supports almost all of their NICs. -- Regards, Hilton Travis Phone: +61-(0)7-3343-3889 Manager, Quark AudioVisual Phone: +61-(0)419-792-394 Quark Computers http://www.QuarkAV.com/ (Brisbane, Australia) http://www.QuarkAV.net/ Open Source Projects: http://www.ares-desktop.org/ http://www.mamboband.org/ Non Linear Video Editing Solutions & Digital Audio Workstations Network Administration, SmoothWall Firewalls, NOD32 AntiVirus Conference and Seminar AudioVisual Production and Recording War doesn't determine who is right. War determines who is left. |