LinuxQuestions.org
Help answer threads with 0 replies.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Hardware
User Name
Password
Linux - Hardware This forum is for Hardware issues.
Having trouble installing a piece of hardware? Want to know if that peripheral is compatible with Linux?

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 05-02-2006, 03:23 AM   #1
cjae
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2004
Distribution: bouncing
Posts: 277

Rep: Reputation: 30
dell 2708 switch?


Hi,

Had trouble with one these lately.
http://www1.ap.dell.com/content/prod...=th&l=en&s=lca

I this is a switch not a router correct than runs at gigabit speeds, right.

I tried to get into it via it's instruction manual by the old browser way. 192.168.0.2 I think is what it was. I know it was the right address as it was the one on the site, in the manual and in the quick install pamphlet.

Ok so that didn't work so I tried various ones from linksys, dlink, etc... nothing.

It also had a managed and unmanaged button, which you had to press with a pin. I believe that had to on so you acccess the box, but that did not work either.

Would this switch have supported NAT, and had any thing like SPI? Cause I sent it back as it was far too expensive for what was needed.
A coughed up for a linksys router befsx41 that was only 10/100 but suffice.

The whole reason was to make a two box lan from tcp/ip and wan connection.

The box has eight ports starting at one which I plugged the wan line into. And box got port 2 and box two got box three. Which was great for internet connection. Would not work for lan as the addresses where not a private ip address.

I even just tried using the windows lan maker or whatever it is called. Nothing.

What was wrong aside from the obvious dell switch not allowing configuration.
 
Old 05-02-2006, 08:30 AM   #2
farslayer
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: Northeast Ohio
Distribution: linuxdebian
Posts: 7,247
Blog Entries: 5

Rep: Reputation: 191Reputation: 191
Switches do not run NAT.

A managed switch is NOT a router and not a gateway, and is not an Internet sharing device. it is simply a managed swith that you can gather port statistics from, lock out ports, create seperate virtual LANs inside the switch, or force the ports into specific configurations (10/100/1000 Full or half duplex) but it is in no way a gateway device.

A router is the correct option, and even though your router is only 10/100 I can bet your internet connection is no whwre near that speed (and if it is I'm moving to your neighborhood)
 
Old 05-02-2006, 06:04 PM   #3
cjae
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2004
Distribution: bouncing
Posts: 277

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 30
Ok so why would be dell send out such a thing if there is no useful purpose it could serve. Why not just a router? Why this thing? Does anybody know what I could have done different to access the box?

I would need a router to use this thing properly right?(take into account this lan was not going to be setup practically, humor the switch)

Or would dell have expected that I setup the switch with a virtual lan? Would this be possible? I have only read up on them little.

I ask because I want to know if dell is just sending stuff without practical use.

Thanks farslayer, the internet connection is only like 1.5 mbps or something and as far a file transfers go the 100 mbps will do although the nics on the the boxes are gigabit.
 
Old 05-02-2006, 09:42 PM   #4
farslayer
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: Northeast Ohio
Distribution: linuxdebian
Posts: 7,247
Blog Entries: 5

Rep: Reputation: 191Reputation: 191
For sharing the Internet the Router is the proper device, that router will actually support Internet sharing for 254 computers, but alas it only has 4 port switch built in.. so What's a Networtk admin to do ? Why add a switch of course !! You can connect multiple switches together in the network behind the router to allow more computers to share the network and the internet through your router.

Dell for some reason on the business site always recommends you buy a switch these days.. I guess it's their latest marketing tactic.

You are correct that if both PC's have GIG cards in them plugging them into the built in switch ports in the router will limit the transfer speed of the computers when copying files back and forth. but it will not affect the speed they can access the internet. If you want to take advantage of the GIG Nic cards you could purchase an inexpensive (relatively speaking) Gigabit switch to plug both PC's into then connect that switch to the Router to gain Internet access..

For a small network a managed switch is probably overkill and it also makes the price a bit steeper. an inmanaged Gig switch would be cheaper and would probably suit your needs if you are constantly copying HUGE files back and forth between your machines. if it's typically small files I wouldn't worry about it.
 
Old 05-03-2006, 01:55 AM   #5
cjae
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2004
Distribution: bouncing
Posts: 277

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 30
I see thanks for clearing it up. They probably assume that I would want the gig transfer speed and give me the switch and then hope I get a router as well either from them or on my own.

So if say I wanted network more than 254 machines.

The current ip of the router would be 192.168.1.1-254 as 0 and 255 are used right? So then could I start another 254 like on 192.168.2.1-254 or no? or would I use 192.168.0.1-254 also wouldn't I have to change my subnet mask to reflect 254 more machines? like 255.255.0.0.
 
Old 05-03-2006, 08:27 AM   #6
farslayer
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: Northeast Ohio
Distribution: linuxdebian
Posts: 7,247
Blog Entries: 5

Rep: Reputation: 191Reputation: 191
Network Address is 192.168.1.0
Broadcast addrsss is 192.168.1.255
Router address is 192.168.1.1
Subnet mask 255.255.255.0
Host addresses would be in the range of 192.168.1.2 - 192.168.1.254

I guess I should have said 254 hosts not PC's since the router itself is using one of those IP addresses..

if you chaned the mask to 255.255.0.0 that is closer to 256 X 256 - 2 = 65534 Hosts are covered by that netmask.. A totally impractical number for any network segment. A netmask that large is really a bad idea because it covers so many addressess.

about the largest netmask I would ever apply would be 255.255.252.0 which gives you close to 1022 Hosts on a segment (still too many really.. )
 
Old 05-03-2006, 04:57 PM   #7
cjae
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2004
Distribution: bouncing
Posts: 277

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 30
Thanks Farslayer.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Good deal? $750 OFF coupon for DELL and other coupns for DELL penguin12 General 7 07-14-2005 06:12 PM
thread switch results in kernel stack switch superstition Linux - General 1 05-18-2005 12:48 AM
set up DSL thru SWITCH - winXp connected to SWITCH too husz Linux - Newbie 5 04-22-2004 01:08 AM
Dell dell GX270, Redhat 9, geforce 5200 problem eiffel Linux - Software 3 10-10-2003 01:07 AM
Help with Dell TrueMobile 1100 wlan adapter on Dell inspiron 8200 with suse8.1 simpson75us Linux - Laptop and Netbook 0 08-11-2003 11:34 AM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Hardware

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:37 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration