Trying to figure out a network solution

B

BMORIN

Weaksauce
Joined
Jun 11, 2004
Messages
66
Need a creative networking solution. Any help is greatly appreciated. I'm an absolute novice in doing this, but enjoy doing it.

Here's what I have
6 computers and 1 copier all connected together on a 8 port hub (no internet) (everything cat5). It's just a simple peer to peer network.

Here's what I need to do:
Hook onto a wirelessG router with a satellite broadband connected to it so I can share the broadband over the network both wirelessly and to a possible 8 hardwired computers

I also need something to expand the range of the wireless because the access point will be a little more than 300 feet where some need to access it. My router will be downstairs in a far corner of the building and most the work takes place upstairs about 500 ft away or so. It is a steel building if that makes any difference.

I don't know if there are any 8port wireless routers out there (can only find 4 port), if not, what do I need to put together to accomplish what I need. I have a wirelessB network in my home but too ignorant to know how to expand the range or add another access point to expand my coverage.

I know it's probably some simple solutions, but I would appreciate any advice.

Thx
 
Just find an 802.11b/g wireless access point. Run a Cat5 line to it and hook it into the hub or the switched ports on the router. Make sure the physical location of the Access Point near the computers you want to use it.

Otherwise, just run a cat5 line up to that area of the building and then hook a switch up there.

You shouldn't have any problems with the router supporting all the computers you have and then some.
 
Let me get this straight, I just need to get a wireless G access point, plug my broadband into that and then run a cat5 line from the access point to one of the available ports on my 8 port hub? That router will act as all the firewall I need? If I get a 4port Wireless G instead of an access point that means I can add 4 more computers to my network?

I can't move the hub. The broadband is going to be installed where the hub is so it wouldn't be easy for me to run cat5 from the satellite to the access point near the computers and then cat5 back to the hub. I may be stretching the signal to far as well as that would be more than 100m to get the broadband to the access point, back to the hub, then back to a computer.

It seems to be best to keep the access point in the same place as the broadband connection and the hub. Will the wireless reach 500 ft? Are there any good things out there to increase the range that far?

Sorry if I'm asking stupid questions,
Thx
 
You could also look into access points that can be used as repeaters to expand your coverage of the network! Then you wouldn't have to mess around with hardwiring it!
 
There is no such thing as a stupid question. If you have a clear line of sight i.e. no walls, or anything blocking signal it might stretched 500ft but probably wont be that great of a signal. In stead of buying another access point to act as a bridge you might want to look into a more power omni-directional or even directional antenae. Check out this site for info on different antenaes. Some have gotten 802.11b signals to travel over 1 mile distances by simply changing to a better antenaae. Good luck
 
(INET)-----(Router/Firewall)----(8 Port Hub)----(Access Point)

or


(INET)-------(Router/Firewall/AP)-------(8 Port Hub)

If you use the second option you will have enough ports available as you only need one spare port and from your description you have one left...
 
The way I am understanding your layout is this: you have a broadband connection on one end of the building along with a hub. You have other computers that want access to the internet on the opposite side of the building. Am I correct?

Here's how I would wire it up:

Broadband --> router --> hub ------------switch on other side of building.

Run the broadband into a router and then drop one line to the existing hub. That way those computers are all set. The router should have 4 ports available for use (3 after the hub is hooked up). Just run 1 long cat5 line to the other side of the building and put a switch or two or three over there (run the line from the router to the switch). Keep cascading them as necessary. This way you aren't dealing with wireless being strong in one area of a room or not in every room. 500' is quite a distance for wireless unless you have a good open line of sight. Plus 10/100 switches are relatively cheap and reliable for a network.

I would stick with hardwire with the distances you are talking unless you have some major physical restrictions to worry about (like concrete walls and what-not) that you can't get around. But those same restrictions are going to effect wireless too.
 
I would, if I was you, (and ive set up a lot of networks that are complex)

get a plain wired router... yes the good ones can act as a very good firewall, the D link ones have some rather good advanced filtering and such built in, all you have to do is configure them.

from that router, run a cat5e cable to your current hub/switch

from the hub/switch run another wire to the other building... and add another switch there onto that

from that switch go to the center of where the wireless access computers are and install a wireless access point. google WAP and find some reviews ofvarious brands, see which ones will be good for the distances and speeds you want.

oh, and I would shy away from linksys, they have security issues in the routers... and their WAPs have been in the past plagued with low ranges.

I use D link for everything.
 
Man, I really appreciate all the solution ideas. After reading all of them, here's what Im thinking, help me out with some feedback:

Broand -> 4Port Wireless Router -> 8 port Hub -> another 4 port Wireless Router up stairs

What do you think of that?
That would give me wireless downstairs and wireless upstairs. I can use the one open port on my 8 port hub to send a wire upstairs to my second wireless router. Will this work?

I'm also new to adding hubs to hubs or routers to routers. Is it as simple as just running a cat5 line from the port of one to a port on the other. Any configuring to be done there or do you just plug it in?

There's also one possible problem. All the computers have static IP's. The copier company says that they have to be static to access this special copier. Will it be a problem for me getting those computers to connect to the internet? Everything I've done before has always been dynamic and automatically configures with the router to get the internet.

Thx so much
 
Static is fine. Disable DHCP on the router(s). Actually you don't necessarily have to do that but if all workstations will be static then I'd do it. If you have a hybrid DHCP LAN, then just make the static IP's out of the range of dynamic IP's on your DHCP server. You don't need a second router. You realize that right? You can get another AP/router combo. They are usually cheaper than dedicated Access Points and you could use it as such. Just bypass the WAN port on that device and definitely turn off DHCP.

As to the hub cabling question. Depends on your gear. Most contemporary switches, even cheap ones, will be autosensing, meaning you wouldn't need a dedicated uplink port or crossover cable. If not, and you don't have an uplink on the second hub/switch, then you would need a X-over. Incidentally, for 8 or more clients you really ought to consider throwing your hub away and replacing it with a switch. It won't be very efficient if it's getting hammered while the switch has a seperate collision domain and dedicated bandwidth to each port. Hubs are pretty much dead equipment these days. Use it if you want. Not a huge deal, just the more clients you have the worse off the hub becomes in terms of performance.
 
ktwebb said:
Incidentally, for 8 or more clients you really ought to consider throwing your hub away and replacing it with a switch. It won't be very efficient if it's getting hammered while the switch has a seperate collision domain and dedicated bandwidth to each port. Hubs are pretty much dead equipment these days. Use it if you want. Not a huge deal, just the more clients you have the worse off the hub becomes in terms of performance.
Click to expand...

Take a good, hard look at this advice. You can get an 8 port switch for 40-50 bucks. There really is no reason to use hubs anymore. Donate the hub to a school or church or something, and get a switch. You'll be glad you did.
 
OK, I'll take that advice. I installed the hub about 3 years ago and the network has been sitting like that ever since. Computers have just been dialing up to internet but I am sick of that so I'm needing broadband (sharing 1 MB) and might as well add some wireless so I can get the broadband on my laptop when I bring it in the building, or for anyone else.

The only reason I was thinking of the second wireless router is that it would give me wireless coverage upstairs while the first wireless router would give me coverage downstairs. I understand I could just get an AP upstairs, but for few extra dollars I can get 4 lan ports upstairs. Is this good thinking or not a good idea?

If not, I'll just use one wireless 4 port router and go from the Satellite broadband downstairs, cat5 line to my wireless router upstairs, cat5 line back to my switch, then from my switch to the 6 computers and 1 copier.

That might get a little long on the cat5 line. I figure about 250ft from satellite to the router, 250ft back to the switch, 250 back up to the computers. That might not work.
 
im completely confused.

Anyone care to draw a picture or explain in like two sentences what needs to be done?
 
Alright, I got another idea, tell me if I can do this:

Satellited broadband -> 8 port router -> 6 computers, 1 copier, and 1 wireless G access point

Will that work?

If I run cable from a port on the router to my internet connection on the AP, will the AP automatically signal the internet to my wireless devices. Just making sure it's not more complicated than that. And will all this work plug and play if the computers all have static IP?
 
uhm....

it would be better if you got a switch, and I also dont think they make 8 port routers.

hell you can get a D link DSS-5+ (5 port switch) for what, $28? Ive seen refurb ones go for $14!

don't try smacking everything on the router, the switch or hub on the router is usually inferior, AND when your net service goes out the router MIGHT depending on model disconnect everyone hooked directly to it as it is trying to reboot to get a new IP from the WAN side.... heck I only use one port on my 4 port router just because of this one fact.

with the D link switches that cheap, I would even use them as repeaters wherever needed!

and cascading a wireless router is a VERY bad idea...
who knows how the router is wired inside.. it may only allow access from the wireless directly to the WAN port after being NAT'ed...it's a gamble to say the least. not to mention the other configuration nightmares you COULD run into.

your network is growing. spread it out... run an 8 port switch where you need it, another 5 port where you need that... and a good rule of thumb is to take how many ports you need now and add 20% to that number, you never know when your needs will grow. and this way you dont have to run out and get a new switch if you need to hook up another hardwired connection!

as cheap as good switches are nowadays... dont skimp...
 
about wiring switches to switches and such...

if you use modern equipment with an 'auto sense' feature... all D link products currently have autosense for BOTH speed and crossover/striaght through... then there is NO difference in how you need to hook it up or what wires to use.
 
Alright, I got another idea, tell me if I can do this:
Satellited broadband -> 8 port router -> 6 computers, 1 copier, and 1 wireless G access point Will that work?
If I run cable from a port on the router to my internet connection on the AP, will the AP automatically signal the internet to my wireless devices. Just making sure it's not more complicated than that. And will all this work plug and play if the computers all have static IP?
Click to expand...

That'll work fine. You can go with your original choice and get the Router/AP combo unit. There's NO problem with doing it that way. You bypass the WAN port, disable the DHCP server and Bingo, you have a switch and AP. Let me say that again, there is NO problem with using the second router's switched LAN ports and the Access Point cascaded off a parent NAT router. None. Usually cheaper than a dedicated AP and like you said, gives you a switch for free.

Yep, an AP is just a wireless hub. A broadcasting CSMA/CA radio hub. Pass through device. Takes what it gets and broadcasts to clients that want it.
 
So, I don't plug into the WAN port on the upstairs wireless router? Can I go like this?:

Satellite Brodband -> WAN port of 4port Wireless Router on 1st floor-> 8 port Switch -> port 1 on my upstairs wireles 4port Router

Will that get my wireless connections upstairs to use my network and the broadband? Oh, and to do it, I need to disable DHCP server on the upstairs wireless (I don't even know what DHCP server means, what it does, or why I need to disable it, lol)? Is all this right? Am I missing anything else? This will give me a good wireless connection on both 1st and 2nd floors?

Sorry if I'm not getting this like I should. This is networking for dummies here. If this is right, I think I may finally have it, lol. I can't tell you how much I appreciate all the great advice. Thx
 
BMORIN said:
So, I don't plug into the WAN port on the upstairs wireless router? Can I go like this?:

Satellite Brodband -> WAN port of 4port Wireless Router on 1st floor-> 8 port Switch -> port 1 on my upstairs wireles 4port Router
Click to expand...

Yup, youve got it. Just a question, do you have any other option besides satellite? I hear its kind of annoying - just some latency issues.

BMORIN said:
Will that get my wireless connections upstairs to use my network and the broadband?
Click to expand...

Yes. You will probably want to specify a static IP for your wireless router on your main router, and then specify the same static IP for your LAN IP for the wireless router.

BMORIN said:
Oh, and to do it, I need to disable DHCP server on the upstairs wireless (I don't even know what DHCP server means, what it does, or why I need to disable it, lol)? Is all this right? Am I missing anything else? This will give me a good wireless connection on both 1st and 2nd floors?

Sorry if I'm not getting this like I should. This is networking for dummies here. If this is right, I think I may finally have it, lol. I can't tell you how much I appreciate all the great advice. Thx
Click to expand...

DHCP is dynamic host control protocol. A DHCP server assigns IPs on a LAN. With a DHCP server, you don't have to staticly assign an IP, subnet mask, or gateway to each machine, which makes setting up a network much easier. You want to disable DHCP on the wireless router because your router connected to the broadband should be acting as your DHCP server, and you don't want 2 on the same LAN.

I think youve got it. You should have a good wireless connection on both floors (depending on distances, obstacles, building materials, etc.)
 
Darkstar850 said:
Just a question, do you have any other option besides satellite? I hear its kind of annoying - just some latency issues.
Click to expand...

No other option. There is a new housing community right next to us but they won't pull RoadRunner to our location. Oh, and DSL unavailable in our city.

Darkstar850 said:
You will probably want to specify a static IP for your wireless router on your main router, and then specify the same static IP for your LAN IP for the wireless router.
Click to expand...

Not quite getting this. Specify the same IP address for both 1st floor and 2nd floor wireless routers? I thought you couldn't do that.

Darkstar850 said:
DHCP is dynamic host control protocol. A DHCP server assigns IPs on a LAN. With a DHCP server, you don't have to staticly assign an IP, subnet mask, or gateway to each machine, which makes setting up a network much easier. You want to disable DHCP on the wireless router because your router connected to the broadband should be acting as your DHCP server, and you don't want 2 on the same LAN.
Click to expand...

Thx for clearing some of that up. Let me see if I got this. First of all, all the computers & 1 copier are static right now (the computers have to be static on the network to communicate with this new high performance copier I got; something about the copier not being able to communicate with something if it gets outside a certain range).

Anyhow, since everything needs to be static, let me know what I have to do to keep everything communicating. Right now my subnet mask is 255.255.255.0 on all the computers and 1 copier. The IP's are the same right up until the last 3 digits. I have no idea what the gateway is set to, does it matter? Can I just disable DHCP server on both the first floor and second floor wireless routers and make them static with the same subnet mask and similar IP (changing only the last 3 digits)? What do I need to do with the gateway. Will this keep everything communicating and keep it all static? I hope it's this simple. Thx once again. Man, I'm learning a lot.
 
BMORIN said:
No other option. There is a new housing community right next to us but they won't pull RoadRunner to our location. Oh, and DSL unavailable in our city.
Click to expand...

That sucks. Oh well, better than dialup anyway.

BMORIN said:
Not quite getting this. Specify the same IP address for both 1st floor and 2nd floor wireless routers? I thought you couldn't do that.
Click to expand...

Err...no, not exactly. Ok, lets call your main router on the first floor router A. The 2nd floor will be router B. Now router A is connected to your external connection, so it's your gateway, and it should also be your DHCP server. As such, It will have a hosts table with all your machines on your network. I haven't tried exactly this setup before, but I believe it should populate even with staticly assigned IPs on your host.

Ok, so in RouterA's host table, you want to have a static entry that says the IP for Router B is (example number used here) 192.168.0.10. Then you want go into the LAN IP config on router b, and specify that Router B's IP is 192.168.0.10.

So therefore, Router B knows "I am located at 192.168.0.10" and Router A knows "If i want to contact router B or anything attached to it, I need to send packets to 192.168.0.10."



BMORIN said:
Thx for clearing some of that up. Let me see if I got this. First of all, all the computers & 1 copier are static right now (the computers have to be static on the network to communicate with this new high performance copier I got; something about the copier not being able to communicate with something if it gets outside a certain range).
Click to expand...

You could actually still do this with DHCP, as even most basic routers will let you control the DHCP range. However, if you already have static working, there isn't a big reason to change, it would just be easier if you needed to add another host.

BMORIN said:
Anyhow, since everything needs to be static, let me know what I have to do to keep everything communicating. Right now my subnet mask is 255.255.255.0 on all the computers and 1 copier. The IP's are the same right up until the last 3 digits. I have no idea what the gateway is set to, does it matter? Can I just disable DHCP server on both the first floor and second floor wireless routers and make them static with the same subnet mask and similar IP (changing only the last 3 digits)? What do I need to do with the gateway. Will this keep everything communicating and keep it all static? I hope it's this simple. Thx once again. Man, I'm learning a lot.
Click to expand...

The gateway is your device that connects out to the outside world, in this case your 1st floor router. You may have to specify the gateway on each host if you're going to do this all with static IPs.

You should disable DHCP on the 2nd floor router. There is no reason to disable it on the first floor even with your staticly assigned IPs, as it generally wont cause a problem unless you have a machine that has already leased an IP from the DHCP server, and then you try to statically assign another host the same IP. Your subnet mask is fine, just default class c mask. With the small sizes of most SOHO networks, very few people need anything else.
 
Alright, thx for clearing a lot of things up for me and thx for taking the time to help me with a solution.

So, I will have no problem running the DHCP server on router A with all my computers set to static IP's? Just wanting to confirm that. What do you mean by controlling the DHCP range on router A?

Is there anything else I'm missing, or anything else I should know about some setup difficulties I might have?
 
BMORIN said:
Alright, thx for clearing a lot of things up for me and thx for taking the time to help me with a solution.

So, I will have no problem running the DHCP server on router A with all my computers set to static IP's? Just wanting to confirm that. What do you mean by controlling the DHCP range on router A?

Is there anything else I'm missing, or anything else I should know about some setup difficulties I might have?
Click to expand...

Shouldn't have a problem. It usually just assigns the same IP. If it doesn't work right, you can just manually assign the IP on the router to the device.

By controlling the DHCP range I mean that you can specify a starting and ending IP for your DHCP, so you can control the IPs that are handed out by the server.

I think you're all set. Give it a try, its the best way to really learn it.
 
Again, thx for all the help. I think I have one last question before I tackle this next week: what happens when my laptop is within range of both wireless router A and wireless router B?
 
if you have them set to infrastructure mode they will choose whichever one is stronger signal. they can actually switch from one to the other as you move and create a seamless networked environment
 
as per dhcp serving range:


a good setup is a class C IP range... that means anything that needs an IP can have one between 192.168.0.1 and 192.168.0.254 (.0 and .255 are reserved for special use)

Ill stay out of the multiple subnets subject to keep things simple, except for saying that 102.168.1.x computers CANNOT see computers on 192.168.0.x and so on and so on.

class C IPs MUST use a netmask of 255.255.255.0 (just go with it until you feel comfortable with learning some complex things)

your router needs an IP. my advice is setting it to 192.168.0.1 (that means all your systems would have to be on the 0 subnet, means nothing other then you cant use anything but a 0 in the third number)

with a DHCP server:
when a system powers up that has not been assigned an IP manually...
it broadcasts "hey I need an IP any DHCP servers out there?" and your server answers, "yes, take this IP and all these other settings."
now... you set your router to assign IPs in a certain range. a good idea would be .100 to .199, giving you 100 systems that can have an automatic IP assigned them

now... when you manually assign an IP... make sure its not within that range... if you do assign one manually within those numbers, then the DHCP server assigns the same to another system, havvoc will ensue!
I suggest .10 to .99 for manually assigned IPs TO COMPUTERS and .1 to .9 for equipment such as your router. in your example though the router would be the only thing needing an IP.

so... if you followed my example...
192.168.0.1 would be your router
192.168.0.10 - .99 would be manually assigned IPs for computers
192.168.0.100 - .199 would be automatic IPs for anyone auto configured.
and you have .200 to .254 to spare for other things!
 
One last question:

I know the firewall in the router will protect the computers on the network from the internet, but what kind of firewall do I need on all the computers to protect attacks from each other if someone brings in a virus to one of their systems?

Do you not run any software firewall on the computers and just run antivirus on all of them? If you do run software firewalls on all the networked computers, what kind of firewall do you use (or what settings) so they can still communicate with each other and trade files? Or is this why you need a file sharing server?

Sorry, I'm new to all this.
 
don't be sorry hon! questions are good, otherwise how will you learn?

if you have a good amount of computers I reccommend going with a really good CORPORATE antivirus program solution and if you have enough dough to spend even a site license. if yo udont just purchase a volume license of something that provides realtime protection to the systems and configure them ALL to auto update WITHOUT USER INTERVENTION and they will be just fine.

Also run Spubot S&D on all of them every few weeks... after a while youll get the hang of which ones need you to keep running spybot on more often then others.

software firewalls are not the best idea because thats just a band aid... keep the systems clean in the first place, and patched (set windows to auto update without user intervention too) and you will live a much more trouble-free life. If however you are dead set on running a software firewall, zone labs' zonealarm is far and away the best and lest expensive one out there. FREE for non commercial use and the commercial prices are very reasonable.

as for file server. a peer to peer network with each computer sharing files is just ASKING for trouble. I would advise you have a nice dedicated file server with rights set to each user as required... the least amount of rights you can get away with. and also I would advise locking their username to not being able to share their drives AND not being able to install programs. installing the needed apps yourself will actually make things less trouble in the end.
 
Again, a lot of good advice.

jaqie said:
If however you are dead set on running a software firewall, zone labs' zonealarm is far and away the best and lest expensive one out there. FREE for non commercial use and the commercial prices are very reasonable.
Click to expand...
I tried Zone Alarm today but even on the medium setting I couldn't get the computers to communicate each other. They wouldn't even ping each other unless I had the firewall turned off.

jaqie said:
if you have a good amount of computers I reccommend going with a really good CORPORATE antivirus program solution and if you have enough dough to spend even a site license. if yo udont just purchase a volume license of something that provides realtime protection to the systems and configure them ALL to auto update WITHOUT USER INTERVENTION and they will be just fine.
Click to expand...
Like you said, I'll just worry about keeping everything patched and running a good antivirus on them. What kind of antivirus would you suggest?

jaqie said:
Also run Spubot S&D on all of them every few weeks... .
Click to expand...
What are those supposed to do?

jaqie said:
as for file server. a peer to peer network with each computer sharing files is just ASKING for trouble. I would advise you have a nice dedicated file server.
Click to expand...
I've never done a dedicated file server, is it very hard to do? I've built a lot of systems from the ground up, but haven't ever had to configure something like this. Any good places to go to learn how to do one?

I take it that on larger networks, the purpose of the network is not necessarily for computers to be able to communicate with each other, but so that computers can share the same 1) broadband, 2) printer/copier, 3) file server. Any other primary reasons? I've heard of print servers, what the heck do they do? Do people primarily user file servers to share files on the network, or do they use file servers for backing up their system files as well?

Thx for the help.

BTW, when guys go to LAN parties, isn't that a big security risk? To jump in bed with a bunch of other strange computers means that the only real protection you can run is an antivirus, right?
 
BMORIN said:
Again, a lot of good advice.
I tried Zone Alarm today but even on the medium setting I couldn't get the computers to communicate each other. They wouldn't even ping each other unless I had the firewall turned off.
Click to expand...
gotta put them into the 'trusted zone' or that wont work. that means ZA is doing its job.
Like you said, I'll just worry about keeping everything patched and running a good antivirus on them. What kind of antivirus would you suggest?
Click to expand...
norton/symantec 's home versions of stuff SUCKS but their CORPORATE edition rocks. kaspersky is good too, or used to be.
What are those supposed to do?
Click to expand...
remove spyware. trust me you need to do it.
I've never done a dedicated file server, is it very hard to do? I've built a lot of systems from the ground up, but haven't ever had to configure something like this. Any good places to go to learn how to do one?
Click to expand...
ill address this in another post...
I take it that on larger networks, the purpose of the network is not necessarily for computers to be able to communicate with each other, but so that computers can share the same 1) broadband, 2) printer/copier, 3) file server. Any other primary reasons? I've heard of print servers, what the heck do they do? Do people primarily user file servers to share files on the network, or do they use file servers for backing up their system files as well?
Click to expand...
you nailed down most of the reasons right there.
backing up is a good idea too! use GHOST 2003, its perfect for backing up systems.
print server is just a computer or little electronics box that has a printer hooked to it and its sole job is attatching the printer to the network. I would personally use high quality network enabled printers and not use those... its a kind of a band aid solution for SOHO and not larger networks.
Thx for the help.
Click to expand...
its what Im here for hon! I love helping!
BTW, when guys go to LAN parties, isn't that a big security risk? To jump in bed with a bunch of other strange computers means that the only real protection you can run is an antivirus, right?
Click to expand...
no its not a security riisk if you run good antivi and are all patched up. most people at LAN parties are up on this stuff. it kinda comes with the territory.
 
k. on file servers. there is a LOT of info I gotta type and you gotta read so be ready :)

with some SOHOs as they grew they just took one of the normal computers slapped 'server' on it and tucked it in a corner. that is good for SOHO but it just wont cut it for a growing network larger then 10 users.

the thing to realize is that a file server is only going to be taking things from network to the hard drives and vice versa, so superfast CPU is NOT needed. However.. the network card can get hit VERY hard very quickly with a file server, and basic or even high performance IDE drives just can't cut it as they were designed for sequential (one after the other) access and not multiple simultaneous requests for data. running IDE hard drives in a system with more then 10 active users is a very stupid mistake. IDE includes SATA. the drive system designed from the ground up for servers is SCSI. the price may be a bit staggering but I assure you it is well worth it in terms of performance. When it takes forever to do things on a server cuz the drives cant keep up, it's a bad thing. Another thing to worry about is reliability. a user system fails no big deal, a server fails you have a MAJOR problem. when building a server, reliability is THE PARAMOUNT concern. so go with parts that are proven reliable. for low end servers that means chaintech, intel, or tyan motherboards and brand name components all around. for bigger servers you start needing dual systems that mirror eachother for failover, registered ECC ram with motherboards that support it, server cases that have redundant cooling fans and power supplies, etc.

now, for a network your size, there are two options for a server the way I see it, and it depends on how mission critical the data is as to which you want to run. (can you afford server downtime and lost data? it WILL happen without failover and backups)

The less expensive server would have a good case such as this enlight midtower, a trio of 72oo rpm SCSI drives in software RAID5 configuration for data storage, a single IDE drive (20GB will do) fior the operating system itself, a chaintech socket A board with some micron or kingston RAM in it, an older socket A processor such as this processor, an inexpensive PCI or AGP video card, and a GOOD networking card from intel or 3com...and back up its data to some inexpensive large IDE hard drive such as a 160GB 72oo rpm western digital.

The better server would have a case such as this one, an SCA rack like this one for the SCSI drives, three or more of these in raid5, a motherboard like this one with one or two athlon MP processors in it, ECC registered DIMMs, and a hardware RAID5 capable u320 SCSI card. This server would be very good but should be accompanied by a lesser system based on IDE drives ready to take its place as a failover server... you should have a data mirroring solution running between them along with a gigabit network card in each and a crossover cable between them...and have the secondary system backing up the primary every night, BEYOND mirroring it incase of data loss from virii or accidental deletions, etc.

the third option would be to just have a couple of the low end computers mirroring eachother with one of them holding some big IDE drives for backups.

about backups - making backups of the file servers' data is essential if you cant afford to lose it. i would say backing up 2-3 times a week would be best.
 
just thought of something.

you can run zone alarm on the system in a LAN party and still play the games just not serve them. next LAN I ggo to I may take my NAT router just so that im better protected, but I seriously doubt I will. its a place filled with good people.
 
...no more questions? oki then I have a few :p

when are you going to do this and what are you going to end up putting into your network?
 
Thx for all the great responses!! Sorry I haven't responded but I've been out of town the last few days and just got back in.

We don't need a heavy file server even though there are 6 systems. Only 3 of us use our computers heavily. I was doing some research and came upon these servers at mirra.com. Have you heard of them?

We don't have big files to back up, but some important ones. That server is supposed to back up realtime, hold up to 8 backup versions of each file, and offer remote access via internet through their website (mirra.com). I like the realtime backup and the remote access. What do you think? I'm looking at the $500 or the $750 server.

I'm planning on setting up the network like this:
Broadband -> DLink Wireless G Router -> 8 port switch -> 6 computers, Color Laser Copier, & another 8 port switch (upstairs) -> Access Point (upstairs)

How does that look? Everything has to set up static. I'm going to look into Norton's Corporate Antivirus.

What do you think?
 
that's no server, its a network storage solution.

honestly, build a budget PC with a few good parts and a good fast hard drive...
you can run anything you want on it and upgrade it as your needs grow. if they dont it can stay as is.

the network setup looks perfect.
 
jaqie said:
that's no server, its a network storage solution.
Click to expand...

Forgive me stupidity, but what is the difference between a server and a network storage solution. As far as the Mirra is concerned, I like the real-time backup it offers along with remote access. Can I do any of those things with any server I might build? Probably not the remote access I assume.

I have some old parts to a 1ghz system and ATA133 7200rpm in my garage that I could throw together as a server. I've just never done it and never done any research on making a server.
 
Well, I just wanted to thank everyone for their invaluable input in this thread. I have the entire network up and running perfectly along with the satellite broadband and a back-up storage solution. I am extremely happy and except for a couple hitches during install (IP conflict, etc.) it wasn't that much trouble.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top