Ethernet Splitter

[Richard]

Dave, hair shirt or close to brain fade territory? It reminded me how much information I have not used in a long time. The hub less hub was a challenge, but a hub or switch might have been cheaper and certainly a lot easier.

After the discussion above I looked at a bit of my set up and realised that my hub could be retired. I could make use of existing spare switch ports thus saving the tiny amount of power that the hub had been using.

[Dave Rice]

This how my network looks now, the only wired devices are in the workshop. With much more emphasis on wireless now I changed my AP for a dual band AC model. 24.Ghz 450 mbps, 5Ghz 867mbps. I also got fed up with the ISP routers so changed for a rock solid Draytek Vigor, but I left the Synology NAS doing the DHCP server role. The UAP generally does a good job of persuading dual band devices to connect to 5Ghz.

 

[Richard]

I also have a dual band non ISP router complete with a guest option that I have never used. Wi-Fi is a challenge in the house and less than reliable. I have to use wired access for almost everything except my daughter’s and my mobiles which are usually close enough to the router to use Wi-Fi. An Amazon Fire Stick in the bedroom is about as far away from the router as it is possible to go. To connect it via Wi-Fi I used a redeployed, otherwise discarded ISP router. It is situated close enough and on the same level to bypass the walls’ conflict with Wi-Fi, though it is an inelegant solution that might repay re-examination. Mobile service cannot be relied on to work in the house, though texts can usually struggle through.

[Dave Rice]

My AP is as high as possible, right in the middle of the house on the top floor landing ceiling. Where we have the thick wall problem to solve this is what we do and it’s worked every time so far. Only in large or awkward shaped buildings do we need more than one. Unfortunately it involves an external Cat 5 cable to the router which is usually beyond DIY as it involves holes through walls.

I’m on my way to Cornwall tomorrow to try and solve this very problem plus distributing a single FTTC connection to multiple buildings. Normally you’d need a central external AP plus 2 devices per building to do this – one end of a wireless bridge plus an internal AP. I’m hoping the new mesh units I’m using will reduce this to a single unit per building. The first test is encouraging. Not only do they provide a link between each other (like a bridge) they also broadcast locally. We installed one at a local farmhouse as part of a CCTV installation. The mesh unit was strapped to the TV aerial on the chimney pot and I found that I could get a cracking signal all around the ground floor. That was a “light bulb” moment.

In Cornwall 2 of the barn conversions are very close to each other. We’ve tried just pointing an AP from one to the other but the walls are too thick. However it’s just a normal tiled roof so I’m hoping the pole mounted mesh unit on the two storey barn 1 (where the FTTC is) will also service single storey barn 2.

We’ll see. I’m taking test kit to cover all eventualities.

[Bob Williams]

Richard, your last has made me remember an older router I have from my ADSL days, a TP-Link 1043ND:

I’m wondering if I can use this to give my No.2 Gson a range extender to his room. His dad has ADSL in their village and speeds are around 6-7 Mbps. House is an old, solid brick built place and wireless is pants. Their router is the same as my TP-Link 9980, but walls and ceilings are anti-wireless. He could run the external Cat 6 I got him last year, up to his room.This would give him 3 more ports to play with, and Gigabit ethernet. When I first had FTTC, I used this router in combination with an Openreach modem. The combo was utter carp with FTTC and I achieved much better speeds and a stable service, with the VDSL TP-Link 9980.

When the Thought Police arrive at your door, think -
I'm out.

[Richard]

Yes Bob, it is quite easy. You will have to give the old router an IP address that matches with the new network by logging into it before you connect it to any other network. Then you will be able to log into it when it is connected. You might like to turn off the Wi-Fi if it not being used.

Do turn off DHCP before you connect it to the network and do not use the WAN port.

[The Duke]

Bob – i may be wrong, dave will surely pit me right quick. I seem to recall something about if you use a range extender it half’s the speed. Not too bad if you have 20meg or above, bit 3-6 meg, you could kill the bandwidth just to extend the signal .

 

I’m sure dave will slap me down, or fill the holes in. I’ve never used a second router, in bridge mode, i think it’s called, so have no experience, just some vague memory that maybe totally wrong.

[Richard]

I only use the second router in switch mode not using the WAN port, disabling the DHCP, giving the LAN side a LAN address and getting three extra ports at the end of the wire, the four wires back to the mother ship router. There should be no loss of speed that way unless the network is overloaded. As far as I know a range extender picks up the Wi-Fi signal and acts as a sort of relay. Whereas the ex-router acts as a switch providing a new access point if its Wi-Fi is enabled.

[Wheels-Of-Fire]

Dave

Just a quick bow to your superior practical knowledge on 10baseT networks ?

A network hub is just a tiny bit more than a wiring concentrater because of the sesperate RX and TX pairs used. With just 2 computers a simple crossover cable will do but with more than that a bit more logic is required. A hub still does not analise packets though, it only detects electrical activity on its ports and the very simplest hubs can’t do duplex working either

I read your link about hub less connections though. It may be posible to get a few computers connected if their NICs support auto RX, TX senceing.

[Author]

Posts