Way OT: Routers and Switches

[Shadow Lord]

I am by no means a networking expert so I am hoping to get some insight from those of you more qualified.

Does your router port speed need to match your switch speed?

To clarify up to now anytime I have bought a router or switch the ports had the same max speed (i.e. 1Gb switches with a router that also had 1Gb ports). However, as speeds seem to get faster and faster for LANs routers don't seem to be keeping up. For example on a lark I was looking around at 100Gb networking equipment. I can find NICs that support that speed, as well as smart switches that have multiple 100Gb ports, but I can't find any routers that have 100Gb ports.

Is this because it is unnecessary since a router usually connect to different networks, in most cases a much slower WAN (internet) to a much faster LAN? From WAN to LAN the router is already speed limited by the WAN connection so having 100Gb pipes doesn't help. Within the LAN the heavy lifting (for example data transfer from a server to a workstation) is done by the switch and the router has minimal to no role in the process. I am guessing this depends on the configuration, i.e. as long as the router is not sitting in between the workstation and the server. So a 1Gb router to switch connection is more then enough for passing data like DHCP, DNS, firewall, etc. and is not a bottleneck.

Or does having a router with slower ports (i.e. ample processing power but pipes are smaller) effect things like firewall, DHCP, DNS, etc. and in turn slow down the whole network by being a bottleneck and you should ideally use 100Gb routers with 100Gb switches but they just don't exist in the consumer space?

TIA!

 

[rittwage]

Only the traffic that has to flow over the slower port is affected.

Pretty much everything is 1GB or above now, so there is no reason to use 20+ year old 10/100 gear.

10Gb+ equipment is pretty much only used for backhaul and SANs.

 

[Shadow Lord]

Only the traffic that has to flow over the slower port is affected.

Ok. so what traffic is that? For example would a workstation to workstation transfer, both connected to the switch, need to send traffic trhough the router? Or would the router only be hit for DHCP IP assignment, looking up DNS, getting something off the internet, etc?

Pretty much everything is 1GB or above now, so there is no reason to use 20+ year old 10/100 gear.

True, not in general. For our particular hobby it was my understanding based on some recent postings on CCTalk that the newer routers/switches have issues with older systems (half duplex support, 10G ports not behaving well with 100mb ports, etc.). The reason to use the old gear, on a home LAN for a hobby, is that one the gear is already there and installed and costs nothing.

10Gb+ equipment is pretty much only used for backhaul and SANs.

Really? I am seeing many desktops now and server MB having 10gbps NICs built in. This includes the new lineup of Apple HW as well.

 

[tradde]

If both workstations are on the same subnet then the router is not really involved. Subnet being something like 192.168.1.x DHCP likely comes from the router and if you have your own DNS then it might not even provide that unless your DNS has to do a lookup. I use 10G ports on my Linux box to my NAS so my copies don't take forever. I backup large files there.

 

[rittwage]

Really? I am seeing many desktops now and server MB having 10gbps NICs built in. This includes the new lineup of Apple HW as well.

It's just beginning. It is not mainstream to the desktop. It requires new infrastructure cabling (CAT 6A) where most clients are going to have only CAT 5E or possibly early CAT 6 if they have a newer building. CAT 6A has only been available commercially for a few years (2018-2019 or so). You can run 10Gb over good 6 or 6e, but with considerable distance limitations (less than 50 meters).

You basically have to have good new cabling, all installed properly. Unless you are talking about short runs over short patch cables only.

 

[tradde]

I ran fiber for my 10G connection.

 

[mark0x01]

I am by no means a networking expert so I am hoping to get some insight from those of you more qualified.

Does your router port speed need to match your switch speed?

Not normally, but some higher speed ports may have issues with much slower ones

To clarify up to now anytime I have bought a router or switch the ports had the same max speed (i.e. 1Gb switches with a router that also had 1Gb ports). However, as speeds seem to get faster and faster for LANs routers don't seem to be keeping up. For example on a lark I was looking around at 100Gb networking equipment. I can find NICs that support that speed, as well as smart switches that have multiple 100Gb ports, but I can't find any routers that have 100Gb ports.

They do exist, but mainly in the Internet Backbone space and can be eye wateringly expensive.

Is this because it is unnecessary since a router usually connect to different networks, in most cases a much slower WAN (internet) to a much faster LAN? From WAN to LAN the router is already speed limited by the WAN connection so having 100Gb pipes doesn't help. Within the LAN the heavy lifting (for example data transfer from a server to a workstation) is done by the switch and the router has minimal to no role in the process. I am guessing this depends on the configuration, i.e. as long as the router is not sitting in between the workstation and the server. So a 1Gb router to switch connection is more then enough for passing data like DHCP, DNS, firewall, etc. and is not a bottleneck.

Or does having a router with slower ports (i.e. ample processing power but pipes are smaller) effect things like firewall, DHCP, DNS, etc. and in turn slow down the whole network by being a bottleneck and you should ideally use 100Gb routers with 100Gb switches but they just don't exist in the consumer space?

TIA!

For home use, as long as your router can handle the throughput of your upstream connection, which isn't always exactly related to the port speed, you are fine.
Many older routers will max out before reaching the rated port speed.
For internal/home use, unless you are moving large amounts of data around your network, 1G is usually adequate and interoperates with 100M better than 10G ports.
When you get into SFP's the one used can also make a difference in lower speed compatability as well.

 

[Shadow Lord]

Thanks for the detailed response.

Not normally, but some higher speed ports may have issues with much slower ones

Yes, I had heard this was an issue.

They do exist, but mainly in the Internet Backbone space and can be eye wateringly expensive.

O.k. The switches are already "eye wateringly" expensive. I hate to see how much the routers are... LOL

For home use, as long as your router can handle the throughput of your upstream connection, which isn't always exactly related to the port speed, you are fine.
Many older routers will max out before reaching the rated port speed.

My current router is a NETGEAR SRX5308 which can handle almost up to (950Mbps) on the WAN side. Considering my downstream speed here peaks at 400 I still have room to grow.

For internal/home use, unless you are moving large amounts of data around your network, 1G is usually adequate and interoperates with 100M better than 10G ports.

I am not planning a major upgrade (yet) but I just found it interesting that the situation existed. You can even get smaller port count 10G switches for reasonable prices now but the routers seem to be still be out of reach. My question was more for a technical understanding i.e. if the router is not at the center of your network then is there enough data being passed through your router to even need anything faster then a 1G port? I can see it being an issue if you have devices plugged directly into the router (i.e. a 10G NIC on your computer into a 1G router port) because now all data from that workstation has to go through the router.

 

[jafir]

If you search for 100GbE router you should find some routers pretty easily. But I’d imagine that most managed switches that support 10gbe or higher are “level 3” devices that support some routing features too.

 

[Shadow Lord]

If you search for 100GbE router you should find some routers pretty easily.

You would be surprised. Yes, items can be found but not necessarily aimed at the "prosumer" space.

But I’d imagine that most managed switches that support 10gbe or higher are “level 3” devices that support some routing features too.

This is where my disclaimer of not being a "networking expert" kicks in. So yes I have seen many of the switches advertise as being managed and/or level 3. So what does that mean? And how is that different from a full fledged router? Does a "level 3" switch provide a DHCP server, firewalling, etc. or does it just have routing tables that you would need to setup manually?

 

[jafir]

So when you’re talking about router, you’re talking about for your home internet access type of thing? Is that right?

In that case it only needs to be as fast as your internet connection. (Maybe slightly faster because not everyone advertises bandwidth the same way). Then you could plug that router into a much faster switch for all of your devices that can communicate with each other at higher speeds.

 

[Caluser2000]

I use a 100/10 switch to step down from my ISP supplied 1000/100/10 Router for them to access the internet reliably using ethernet.

My Dos/win 3.X, OS/2 v3/4 Warp and Win9x systems are all able to Telnet, FTP and WWW this way.

Oh and my ACORN RiscPCs and old Linux distros.

Networking comes hand in hand with using computers so I don't consider it OT by the way.

 

[Caluser2000]

My My .Have I broken the Internet AGAIN? I would have thought every vintage computer hobbiest did this. .

 

[Shadow Lord]

I use a 100/10 switch to step down from my ISP supplied 1000/100/10 Router for them to access the internet reliably using ethernet.

I think that is what most people would do. i.e. they may have one or two new systems with 10G access but the majority of the systems will be 1G and slower and a good 24 port 1g switch can be had for under a $100-$150....

Networking comes hand in hand with using computers so I don't consider it OT by the way.

Yeah, but even I couldn't do the mental gymnastics necessary to make 100G networking a vintage topic....

 

[mark0x01]

Routing requires more decision making than a plain switch which can handle the basic requirements in the switch chip itself.
Basic routing requires some cpu, and then add other features like firewall and VPN, and that needs even more processing power.
This ramps up quickly as the port count and speed increases.

 

[Caluser2000]

Second hand IDSL routers make good cheap switches.

 

[Unknown_K]

I use a 100/10 switch to step down from my ISP supplied 1000/100/10 Router for them to access the internet reliably using ethernet.

My Dos/win 3.X, OS/2 v3/4 Warp and Win9x systems are all able to Telnet, FTP and WWW this way.

Oh and my ACORN RiscPCs and old Linux distros.

Networking comes hand in hand with using computers so I don't consider it OT by the way.

I figured everyone did that.

My ISP provided a modem and a router with I think 4 1GB ports plus wireless. I have an 8 port 1GB switch in my room the same model in my lab (along with a 16 port GB switch if needed) and a 3com 24 port 10/100MB switch for the older gear. I also have a couple extra 10/100 switches in case the current one breaks, or I need more ports.

I actually kept all of my old hubs from back in the day if I need to wire up coax to an XT.

All of this stuff will end up obsolete and junked sooner or later since most people don't want to run cables anymore and just use wireless.

 

[skate323k137]

All of this stuff will end up obsolete and junked sooner or later since most people don't want to run cables anymore and just use wireless.

I kept my main stuff hardwired as a rule, until I installed a wifi 6 mesh network at home. The difference with using a cable now is negligible for me for day to day use. Each of the AP units (I have 3) has some LAN ports though, which is super convenient for working with old hardware in my office. I can hook up my old Pismo or Power Macs etc with no issue.

 

[Unknown_K]

When I play Age of Empires II The Conquerors on Voobly.com in 8 player mode people with wifi tend to cause lags (bandwidth is fine but latency goes to shit from multiple users).

 

[Caluser2000]

I just routed 35mtrs Cat6 cabling from the ISP router out to my shed hobby area a month ago, So yes folk still use cabled networking.