Literally why do we even have switches anymore? Routers are vastly

>>56885473
Are you fucking serious?
You want a full router interface for a single device?

>>56885473
Well, one useful instance that comes to mind is networking multiple machines without a router.

>>56885473
are you a neet by any chance?
stick to your gpu threads.

File: 5cc6a589a13b83556454d1084cb44052561715bf0825469aa47b55c172b8e598[1].jpg (49KB, 600x400px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 600x400px

>>56885473
We have 2000 ports in teh company I work, at our main building... lets use routers to cover all those...

Are you retarded OP or you just read a 5 line article about routers and you think you are a network guru now???

File: 1475129959680.jpg (275KB, 870x960px) Image search: [Google]

275KB, 870x960px

>router for every device

>>56885473
You don't know what you're talking about or you're only looking at it from a residential user point of view.

>>56885603
>or
Why not both?

>>56885473
Faggot if you want to troll, at least follow it up.

Until then, go back and read introduction to networking, of go play a game and leave that shit, it clearly is beyond your comprehension

>>56885709
>at least follow it up.
With what? I made my case. There is nothing that Switches can do that Routers can not do better and faster. You niggers bitching about "scalability" are just poorfags who are afraid to splurge on a few extra IP addresses, so you're literally not even worth talking to.

File: 52807293[1].jpg (91KB, 311x311px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 311x311px

>>56885725

>>56885735
>posting le dead candyman.
>>http://reddit.com/r/atheism

>>56885725

Even a basic understanding of networking would allow you to understand how retarded your statement is.

>>56885473
You have no idea what you're talking about, you dumb nigger.
Saged and hidden

>>56885473
Never go full retard

Routers are smart but you only need 1. Switches are for extending the network to increase the number of concurrent users/devices.

>>56885473
>>56885473
>power
>latency
>unnecessarily complex network hierarchy

idk op, u tell me

>>56885725

The problem is that that is simply not true. You're either an idiot or this is an awful shitposting/trolling attempt.

Switches DO have specialized ASIC's custom made for switching, which allows them to process frames at a faster rate than with regular hardware.

>>56885725
They cant do express forwarding you fucking asswipe.

>>56885725
Are you the 4chan IT-man? No wonder why this site is going under with slant-eyed m00t at the helm.

>>56885473
Because switches are just for extending the network you dumb nigger

>in b4 i was only pretending to be retarded :^)

>>56885473
Switches are good at what they do. Routers increase latency or some shit
>have $100ish linksys router connected to another router
>try to gayme
>cant even join
>sometimes lets me in a gayme with 1 other person
>buy switch
>gayme through that
>absolutely no problems

>>56885751
"o no he used an old fashioned meme correctly reddit boogeyman is invadeeeeeng D::::::"

File: comfy cat.jpg (88KB, 900x600px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 900x600px

>Dedicated router, WAP, and switch masterrace

File: c905069c92e112cb933569e10c9ef2e1.jpg (13KB, 236x243px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 236x243px

>>56885473

ITT switch faggots on suicide watch

Considering this is shit thread, lets turn it into something remotely useful

How does one learn openwrt or dd-wrt? What is it like compared to cisco ios?

>>56885473
A UPS on every device instead of a plugboard and a single UPS. ok.

>>56891429
>How does one learn openwrt or dd-wrt?
By using it retard.

>>56891429
cisco ios is 10 times more complex

cant really do much on ddwrt and openwrt except the most basic things because they are mainly for routers only

Literally why do we even have routers anymore?
l3 switches can do everything a router can do 10x better (+ much more)

>>56891510
But even those basic things are better than native OSs companies put into their routers, right?

>>56891429
Jesus. You are a dumb breed of retard.
Install it.
Fuck around.
Restore whenever you screw up bad enough.
Done.
Now get out.

>>56891627
geez, do you also suggest people to learn whole networking by just messing with it?

>>56891429
learn IOS, get a job as a cisco engineer, learn ...wrt and write about it in /g/

Get my point?

>>56891429
Well if you suggest using OpenWRT or DD-WRT in a business context then a bunch of people will laugh at you, so there's that.

>>56885473
Literally why do we even have computers anymore? Tablets are vastly superior in pretty much every area.
>IP routing protocols... Computefags BTFO
>videogames... Computefags BTFO
>onboard wi-fi... Computefags BTFO
>portability... Computefags BTFO
>built in 32-64gb flash storage... Computefags BTFO

QUICK!

Someone recommend me a DOCSIS 3.0 Comcast compatible modem with at least 300MB up and down!

>>56892482
Cisco Catalyst 3200 or 4600 APX.

>>56891353
I didn't say anything about an invasion. I was just mentioning a place I thought you would find more welcoming then here, kiddo.

>>56892507
Note compatible with Comcast

>>56891785
tis how i learned

posted from my iPad

>>56891627
>Jesus. You are a dumb breed of retard
As opposed to a smart breed of retard?
Do you have certain standards for retardation or is English your second language?

>>56892565
"Tis how you THINK you learned

>>56892554
Read their fucking compatibility list, you fucking idiot.

>>56892554
Get a better ISP, newfag.

>>56892585
DO you see those modems ANYWHERE ON HERE?!

http://mydeviceinfo.xfinity.com/

>>56892597
Comcast is the best in my area. Bite me

File: Literally Retarted.png (216KB, 927x963px) Image search: [Google]

216KB, 927x963px

>>56892598
Yes, dipshit.

>>56892618
XD

File: 1450479499500.gif (908KB, 500x394px) Image search: [Google]

908KB, 500x394px

>this thread
Christ, contain your autism /g/entoomen.
Also OP confirmed for massive faggot, more news at 5.

>>56892610
Move to a better area, poorcuck.

>>56892598
I don't know, I don't fucking care since I never recommended you shit. Ask them, not us. They know what you can use and they even provide you with a handy list that you can filter with the features you want. Eat 10000 dicks for being such a lazy shit.

>>56892639
Then don't fucking reply to me then retard. If you aren't this guy >>56892507 then fuck off?

File: 3750-x.jpg (22KB, 719x220px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 719x220px

Holy fuck are all of you people retarded? This router has 48 ports, do people seriously use switches in 2016?

>>56892667
>do people seriously use switches in 2016?
Nah. Only poorfags.

>>56892637
>poor
>dude just move lmao
I realize this is bait, but come on man.

>>56892659
I don't care you stupid faggot ass bitch. I gave you the only real solution, you should be sucking my ball hairs off.

>>56892681
Why do you think it's bait? You clearly reside in a shithole that's not worth living in, if your best option is cuck-cast. Why wouldn't you move? What do you have to lose?

File: 1463194463113.jpg (60KB, 706x706px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 706x706px

>>56885473
what do you mean routers?

layer three switches?

>tfw NEET switchfag at age 25, and still not good with computers or people.
I feel like a nerd without the benefits that are supposed to come with nerdiness. Should I kill myself tonight, /g/?

>>56892727
No, he means routers.

>>56892727
>which switch packets at LAYER 3 of the OSI model you dumb fuck.

>>56892695
>You clearly reside in a shithole that's not worth living in
No, that isn't clear at all.

I was able to figure it out, so it's clear enough.

>>56892688
I was asking for suggestions from the compatibility list. Your reply was "hurrr read the compatibility list" so how does that help? Fuck off

>>56892695
>Completely missing the point

You obviously aren't old enough to have your own place

>>56892695
>Why do you think it's bait?
Because no mentally sane person thinks ISP availability determines if a place is worth living.

>>56892800
You're talking to a father of four. When I heard Google Fiber was coming to Arizona, I made the whole family say goodbye to their friends and packed our shit in the van and drove ahead for 18 hours straight.

File: 1466641214841.jpg (30KB, 199x199px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 199x199px

>>56892824

>>56892788
>Your reply was "hurrr read the compatibility list" so how does that help?
If you clean the nut from your brain water maybe you'd be able to think for yourself. You can filter features and then look up reviews for the ones you see or just fucking pick one because it doesn't really matter as long as they're DOCSIS 3. Go nut in your son.

>>56892667
this is a switch

>>56892917
>layer 3 capability
>switch

>>56892873
Just fuck off man, you were of no use to me then, and you're of even less use now. I am aware you can filter results, but they are all practically DOCSIS 3.0 compatible. I am asking specifically which of these results are they best, which manufacturers are the most reputable. I don't care if you don't know, just stop replying to me because you're a fucking down syndrome potato.

>>56892953
Yes, layer 3 switches exist.

>>56885473
This is the opposite of true though. There isn't even a need for routers anymore is 95% of scenarios. A layer 3 switch can do everything necessary. Unless you are pushing tons of traffic and using heavy protocols like BGP there isn't even a point anymore for a dedicated router.

>>56893048
L3 switches typically have only basic ACLs between subnets, though. So if you need something complex you'll still need a router.

>>56893074
No, you would use an actual firewall on top of the layer 3 switch.

The only use for a router at this point is WAN capabilities and large routing tables.

>>56892824
>I made the whole family say goodbye to their friends and packed our shit in the van and drove ahead for 18 hours straight.

I don't believe this.

>>56893101
>No, you would use an actual firewall on top of the layer 3 switch.
You would?

>>56893048
>tfw doing BGP on our switch

Oh look, it's the hourly /v/ makes a thread

>>56893494
Quiet switchfag.

>>56885473

You have to be trolling OP. Nobody is this retarded and allowed anywhere near an internet connection.

>>56885473
What are layer 3 switches for $100 Alex?

>>56885473
Off yourself faggot, you are literally fucking retarded.
I really feel bad for you parents.

>>56885473
Isn't it just a wireless hub?

File: 1427945949837.png (26KB, 273x200px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 273x200px

As a network engineer, let me just say I hate you "layer 3 switch"-fags. You're as bad as cloud-you-name-it salesmen.

>>56893981
L3 switches aren't meant to replace routers though
Maybe in the smallest of environments
Switches with up tagging is just kinda nice to have

>>56893981
If you have a lot of subnets that you need high performance routing between, there's no substitute for a layer 3 switch.

File: this kills the bandwidth.png (15KB, 825x563px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 825x563px

>>56885473
So you're saying that pic related is better than a switching solution?

Are you trolling are are you retarded?

File: 1473610684832.jpg (44KB, 720x539px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 720x539px

>>56894023
>>56894094
If it SWITCHES it is a SWITCH.
If it ROUTES it is a ROUTER.
If it HAS A LOT OF FUCKING PORTS it HAS A LOT OF FUCKING PORTS.

That's just me venting, I do agree with you though, they have a practical place in large-scale networks. I just find them improperly implemented 99% of the time because some slick marketer played buzzword bingo with some sucker.
>mfw

>>56894219
>If it ROUTES it is a ROUTER.
Except an L3 switch only has basic L3 functionality. Some of them won't even do anything but static routing.

File: 1461976869982.jpg (203KB, 381x424px) Image search: [Google]

203KB, 381x424px

>>56894253
>Except an L3 switch only has basic L3 functionality. Some of them won't even do anything but static routing.
>Some of them won't even do anything but static routing.
>do anything but static routing.
>static routing.
>routing.

>>56894332
Meanwhile an actual router is going to be doing far more than static routes.

>>56894332
Nigger, do you want to spend all fucking month setting up static routes for your entire god damn network?

Is it bad that I have a router connected to a gateway that has the primary WAN port connected to an external IPS machine with an IP pass-through on both to-Gateway and to-Router ports?

File: 3f2.jpg (368KB, 3000x3000px) Image search: [Google]

368KB, 3000x3000px

>>56885473

Sure I'll just provision 48-port Cisco ISR's (those exist, r-right you guise?) and instead of stacking them I'll chain them together with their gigabit interfaces.

And then every endpoint with a VoIP phone I'll provision a 12 volt power adapter and a 100 Mbit netgear hub for their computer and phone to share (because I blew all my money on ISR's and couldn't terminate all the runs) because I can't have none of that store-and-forward overhead. No sir, let the VLAN's free float in euphoria.

>>56885473
This thread is retarded.

Sage.

>>56894110
>rooter
>rooter
>rooter

That's not even close to how it works lmao

>>56894110
Wait a minute, doesn't that network make all packets go through all the rooters to every computer almost like a hub?

File: 1474225586438.jpg (45KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 640x480px

>>56894817
>mfw my networking professor regularly says "rooter" and other tech terms incorrectly on purpose every class

File: directly.jpg (41KB, 452x260px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 452x260px

>>56885473
Security

Less unnecessary protocols waiting for a 0day

Less overhead

More relevant ASICs

Fewer points of failure

U r dum an I h8 u

All valid reasons to use switches instead of superfluous routers.

>>56894855
The trick here is the WAN addresses have to route back to the internal network of each router, basically each node here has to go through NAT to communicate with other nodes, this causes undue latency

File: barber-mecheng.jpg (246KB, 1133x1184px) Image search: [Google]

246KB, 1133x1184px

>>56885473
>this hole fucking thread.
>>56894110
>>56885751
i can't even. i eman. jesus.>>56891353

what is even happening on /g/ right now are these new smartphones releasing autism gas?

File: 1325514968247.jpg (68KB, 555x545px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 555x545px

stop being stupid you daft moron.

>>56885473
Obviously never worked in a enterprise environment. Go pitch that bullshit to a CTO and let us know how that works out for you.

>>56892573
This entire thread is so savage

>>56892745
Yes.

>>56891402
whats a WAP

>>56892413
not him, but why?

>>56892610
doubtful.

>tfw my rouer has a built in switch

>>56893048
A layer 3 switch is literally the definition of a router.

>>56892667
>3750-x
>Router

Literally why do we even have trains anymore? Boats are vastly superior in pretty much every area.

While we're at it, let's replace every outlet in the office with individual power generators. Good idea amirite?

File: the original pepe.gif (90KB, 146x93px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 146x93px

Fuck man this thread did it colour me triggered

t. Network Admin

>>56892824
>destroying the lives of your entire immediate family just so you can get faster internet which none of them besides you cares about
I can honestly see some of you fags doing this

>>56899280
>network admin
Then can you explain this: >>56891292

File: 1475157201510.jpg (494KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

494KB, 1024x768px

>>56899304
>have $100ish linksys router connected to another router

double NAT with consumer tier routers

Switches only need to receive the frame, look at the MAC addresses and forward it accordingly. In more complex topologies, it may pop some vlan tagging onto it.

Routers need to decapsulate the L2 frame, make a routing decision, gather the next destination MAC and re-encapsulate the whole frame, which includes calculating a new checksum.

NAT Routers additionally need to deencapsulate the L3 frame and translate the IP addresses and keep track of the connections (PAT).

Businesss routers might have specialized hardware for those tasks, but your run-of-the-mill consumer router will do it in software, on a very weak platform.

And you're doing all these steps twice with double nat, which will also create issues with port forwarding, nat punchthrough and else.

>>56899373
cool, thanks.
Ill have to look those terms up, but the gist of it is:
routers open up the packet, change shit, the repackage it into a new packet then send it on its way
switches just check the mac and forward it without opening it
Right?

File: ob3snx1B7K1se8i5g.jpg (20KB, 306x306px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 306x306px

>>56885473
>I Don't Understand Layer 2: The Post

File: 5w4tehB.png (76KB, 660x680px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 660x680px

>>56898566
Wireless Access Point

jesus

>>56899416
Regarding home networking, yeah.

>>56899416
routers open up the packet, change shit, the repackage it into a new packet then send it on its way. switches just check the mac and forward it without opening it
That's basically it, though a router won't deencapsulate the frame so long as the destination is within the same network. What you probably needed to do was bridge the two routers together so they created a single internal network, this should avoid the potential double NAT issue.

There's technical reason why using two routers would make games unplayable. If that were the case then using one router would just be half as bad.

>>56899468
>There's no technical reason
durf

>>56899468
I just plugged the "internet in" port of the second router into one of the four out ports of the first router.
The way it worked itself out was the first routers network was 192.168.0.X and the second routers output, which was where all of my stuff, was was 192.168.1.X.
It was horrible. Browsing the web was fine but games was usually just a lobby with myself and sometimes one other person.
Tried port forwarding to the second router and then port forwarding from the second router to the device but that didn't work. I don't recall a bridging option either, I might just have been too stupid at the time to know what it mean though.

Go back to >>>/v/ dumb faggot

>>56899426
Eh, he might understand Layer 2, he is just stupidly comparing it to Layer 3 which is kinda dumb. They are their own distinct layers and you can't get away from using Layer 2, it's just that unless you actually need to use the Layer 3 features there's no point in consuming more power just to operate in Layer 2 modes.

You can do IP routing, but how many networks are you operating?
You can create VLANs, but do you need to?
You can create virtual interfaces, but do you need to?
You can do link bundling, but do you need to?
Actually, link bundling is probably the most useful of the potential features you could get out of Layer 3 Switches in the home and he didn't even mention it.

>>56899506
>I just plugged the "internet in" port of the second router into one of the four out ports of the first router.
See, that's your problem. The WAN port is handled differently.
If you had just plugged it into one of the LAN ports they would have been acting as plain switches.

>>56899542
>but how many networks are you operating?
not op, but two sometimes three. One right now though.
>virtual interfaces, but do you need to?
yes.
>You can do link bundling, but do you need to?
Is that where I forward packets from one nic to a virtual interface that connects through a different nic that is on an entirely separate network? if so, yes.

>>56899551
Hmm, you just peaked my interest. I didnt know a router could function like that, taking signal in through its out port.
I thought the routers ports were like master/slave type things.
Ill have to try that

>>56899593
If you have a router with with a switch built in (4 port or 8 port or whatever) then for all intents and purposes that switch functions just like a Layer 2 Switch, which means you can chain them together.
This does of course mean that all the traffic from one side will go across a single link to the other, but if that isn't an issue then it isn't an issue.

Now, if you install something like OpenWRT you can (sometimes? usually?) take command of each individual port and set up VLANs and such because the device is a Layer 3 Switch (aka router).

By default the switch acts as a single Interface on the router and the WAN port acts as another Interface with the only way of crossing between the two Interfaces being Layer 3 routing.

File: KB3733-004_EN_v18e.png (87KB, 554x356px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 554x356px

>>56899551
Dude, I feel so much stuff right now.
Like a year or two of frustration from 7 years ago just came back and its mixed with relief and 3 levels of it doesn't even matter anymore.
Like I don't even game anymore, used a switch, and now use a computer with multiple nics.. it really doesn't even matter at this point.. but what the fuck.. the answer was so obvious, and I knew it had to be obvious at the time but I tried the most complicated bullshit in vein.

>>56899577
>Is that where I forward packets from one nic to a virtual interface that connects through a different nic that is on an entirely separate network? if so, yes.
That sounds like a VLAN.

Link Bundling is where you make multiple links act as a single link, so two 1Gbits links gives you 2Gbits of bandwidth across it, four links gives you 4Gbits. They act as a single link, so, for example, if you set up a server properly with multiple NICs you could bundle them together and have like a 40Gbps connection from your server to your switch which would allow four 10Gbps clients to saturate themselves. Or you use it to connect several switches together so you don't have a bottleneck that a single client could saturate.

>>56899697
Oh, I know what youre talking about.
Isnt that called "bonding" in linux? (Netctl only? plz dont shoot)

>>56899707
Perhaps. It goes under a number of names
Trunking
Link Aggregation
Bundling
Bonding, I guess.

So I'm new at this local networks thing

I still don't understand dick my only interaction with networks is blocking ports and setting up SMB so I could play ps2 games through a fucking ethernet cable

>>56885473
ok

>>56894890
>tfw I'm watching Beast right now
Beast is pretty good

>>56894564
hell no we just use this cool new webframework called ROUTE.js

>>56885500
Routers are objectively better, if you're too retarted to read.

Hijacking shit troll thread:

Lets say you walk into small office company with 1 pc acting as server and 20 workstations. You install Winserver 2012 because that's what the boss bought and you have to install 20 windows machines and attach them to the server. What's the best way you do this? PXE install?

>>56899868
MDT + WDT, or if you want to go full out, SCCM (which is basically MDT + WDT + some other stuff anyway).

>>56899879
Wdt...you mean wds?

>>56899879
whats mdt and wdt

>>56885473
is this bait?
I don't think you understand the difference between routers and switches.
The networking world is moving towards Layer 3 switches now.

>>56892761
>Switching ethernet frames between hosts on the same LAN
>using layer 3

I don't think you understand

>>56892953
Kill yourself you are a complete retard.

>>56899972
Microsoft Deplay Toolkit

>>56894855
routers block broadcasts and this diagram would magically use the ISP for internal routing.

>>56894421
I wish this was true at my company