seting up two hubs

[Possum]

i have two computers out in my shed connected to a 12 port hub and i
have a laptop and another computer concted to another 12 port hub in the
house. how can i get the computers to talk to the computer is the house. i
have a network lead runing from the house to the shed. where abouts is is it
ment to go in to the hubs?
The computers i have in the house are setup like this, the laptop is in
port 1 and the Desktop computer is in port 2, ( the laptop is running XP
Home and the computer is running win 2000 pro, they can't see each other yet
as to i'm unsure how to set xp and win 2000 up to see each other).
In the shed computer 1 is in port 5 and the computer 2 is in port 6.
(etc, etc)

so where do i put the network lead that is in the middle of the hubs. i
tryed putting them in port 12 at each hub and they did'nt work. there is and
extension plug (in and out plug) an RS-232 male plug and a thin Lan plug.

if any one can help me here please, it would be really good.

 

[4000 psi]

you'll need a cross-over cable to connect hub to hub its basically a regular
ethernet cable with a couple of pins reversed ... do a search in google for
cross-over cabling pin out and you'll see what you need to do to the cable
to make it work with 2 hubs

 

[CJT]

i have two computers out in my shed connected to a 12 port hub and i
have a laptop and another computer concted to another 12 port hub in the
house. how can i get the computers to talk to the computer is the house. i
have a network lead runing from the house to the shed. where abouts is is it
ment to go in to the hubs?
The computers i have in the house are setup like this, the laptop is in
port 1 and the Desktop computer is in port 2, ( the laptop is running XP
Home and the computer is running win 2000 pro, they can't see each other yet
as to i'm unsure how to set xp and win 2000 up to see each other).
In the shed computer 1 is in port 5 and the computer 2 is in port 6.
(etc, etc)

so where do i put the network lead that is in the middle of the hubs. i
tryed putting them in port 12 at each hub and they did'nt work. there is and
extension plug (in and out plug) an RS-232 male plug and a thin Lan plug.

if any one can help me here please, it would be really good.

Some hubs have something identified as an "uplink" port (or a port that
can be switched to behave as either an uplink port or regular one). If
yours does, connect that on one end with a regular port on the other
end. If neither of your hubs has an uplink port, you need a crossover
cable in series with your long cable. They can be purchased for about
the same price as a regular Cat5 cable. Or you can construct one if you
have the right crimper using instructions on the Linksys site (among
others).

HTH

 

[CJT]

Some hubs have something identified as an "uplink" port (or a port that
can be switched to behave as either an uplink port or regular one). If
yours does, connect that on one end with a regular port on the other
end. If neither of your hubs has an uplink port, you need a crossover
cable in series with your long cable. They can be purchased for about
the same price as a regular Cat5 cable. Or you can construct one if you
have the right crimper using instructions on the Linksys site (among
others).

HTH

BTW, some of the newer switches/hubs will autosense when a crossover
connection is needed and provide it automatically. You could add one
of those between the two hubs you have, and it would sort things out.
But the crossover cable should be cheaper.

 

[Codswallop]

Some hubs have something identified as an "uplink" port (or a port
that can be switched to behave as either an uplink port or regular
one). If yours does, connect that on one end with a regular port on
the other end.

Alternatively, and if the shed isn't that close to the house, you could
buy a "wireless bridge" which will bridge the two hubs.

Most switches nowadays have uplink ports though -- are they labelled as
switches or hubs (sound like hubs if they're 12-port).

 

[Rod Speed]

you'll need a cross-over cable to connect hub to hub

Not with hubs that have an automatic sense of cable type.

 

[derek / nul]

see www.ozcableguy.com for networking information.

 

[CJT]

Not with hubs that have an automatic sense of cable type.

True, but he already said it didn't work when he simply connected them,
so apparently his don't auto-sense.

<snip>

 

[Rod Speed]

Rod Speed wrote

True, but he already said it didn't work when he simply
connected them, so apparently his don't auto-sense.

You dont know that. The other possibility is the
networking setup given that its a mixed OS config.

 

[David M. Williams]

Connect the uplink port of one hub to any ethernet socket in the other hub.
That's all there is to it.

 

[Possum]

do you mean the plug one lead in the extension plug of one ogf the hubs?

 

[Possum]

thanks all of you for the help, it worked

regards ben

 

[Jamie Nicholls]

You're better off using switches rather than hubs. They're so cheap, I'd
get rid of the hubs.

Under network connections (in control panel, under TCP/IP) Make sure each
computer has a unique IP address and on the same network ID. (IE - use
192.168.1.1 - 192.168.1.4) Otherwise if you have an ADSL router, use DHCP
and set each computer to obtain IP addresses automatically. Also make sure
each machine has the same WORKGROUP name. with windows 2000 and XP right
click my computer, proporties. Then under network identification click
change.

Hope this helps.

 

[CJT]

You're better off using switches rather than hubs. They're so cheap, I'd
get rid of the hubs.

<snip>

I'm of the "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" school. Hubs are fine for
small and/or lightly loaded networks. Once the collision light is on
often, then upgrade.

If buying for expansion and the premium for a switch over a hub is
small or nonexistent, then pick the switch. I moved to switches when
I changed from 10 Mbps to 10/100.

 

[Rod Speed]

You're better off using switches rather than hubs.

Thats unlikely to make any difference with such a small network.

Bet you wouldnt be able to pick it in a double blind trial.

They're so cheap, I'd get rid of the hubs.

Waste of money.

Under network connections (in control panel, under TCP/IP)
Make sure each computer has a unique IP address and on
the same network ID. (IE - use 192.168.1.1 - 192.168.1.4)

That isnt the only way either.

Otherwise if you have an ADSL router, use DHCP and set
each computer to obtain IP addresses automatically. Also
make sure each machine has the same WORKGROUP name.

That last isnt necessary with XP.

 

[CJT]

Thats unlikely to make any difference with such a small network.

Bet you wouldnt be able to pick it in a double blind trial.




Waste of money.

<snip>

I agree. Switches have advantages, but unless the hubs are getting
enough traffic to show collisions (or the connected machines are
dumb and slow enough to have trouble handling the traffic they receive
that isn't intended for them -- that should not be an issue with modern
NICs), hubs are perfectly adequate and the advantages switches offer
won't be useful.

 

[Peter]

Are there ever circumstances where replacing a hub with a switch can
make things not work, or work very slowly?

I did this, and now find that ping and tracert works over the lan, but
Computers Near Me (win2k) takes for ever, minutes or longer, to locate
the other machines...

 

[Rod Speed]

Are there ever circumstances where replacing a hub with
a switch can make things not work, or work very slowly?

Yes, if the switch has a fault or gets its tiny little brain
scrambled with the automatic detection of one port config etc.

Switches are generally more intelligent than
hubs and can get it wrong because of that.

I did this, and now find that ping and tracert works over
the lan, but Computers Near Me (win2k) takes for ever,
minutes or longer, to locate the other machines...

Thats likely because the switch isnt broadcasting everything
it sees on all of its ports. Too smart for its own good there.

 

[Peter]

Yes, if the switch has a fault or gets its tiny little brain
scrambled with the automatic detection of one port config etc.

Switches are generally more intelligent than
hubs and can get it wrong because of that.

After a lot of messing about I think I found it:

(1) one of the PCs had a subnet mask of 255.0.0.0 instead of
255.255.255.0 - presumably this caused a huge amount of broadcasting?

(2) the hub was a 10mbit one, whereas the switch (new Linksys 10/100
auto sensing with auto MDIX) would go to 100mbits on those PCs whose
ports could do the same, and I didn't have "350MHz" cables on those;
the cables were "CAT5E" which I suspect is only 10base2.

(3) The problem was compounded by the fact that none of the PCs will
switch between 10/100 except at power-up, whereas the switch appears
to do that at any time.

Thats likely because the switch isnt broadcasting everything
it sees on all of its ports. Too smart for its own good there.

Can you give specific examples of this, and how they would be handled
by PC config changes?



Peter.

 

[CJT]

After a lot of messing about I think I found it:

(1) one of the PCs had a subnet mask of 255.0.0.0 instead of
255.255.255.0 - presumably this caused a huge amount of broadcasting?

I can imagine that might be a problem, although I don't think broadcasts
normally pass through routers, so I doubt they left your little part of
the world. I wouldn't be surprised if it confused Windows, though,
which wouldn't know whether it was dealing with a Class A or C network.

(2) the hub was a 10mbit one, whereas the switch (new Linksys 10/100
auto sensing with auto MDIX) would go to 100mbits on those PCs whose
ports could do the same, and I didn't have "350MHz" cables on those;
the cables were "CAT5E" which I suspect is only 10base2.

Cat5e should be more than adequate for 10/100, or even gigabit.

(3) The problem was compounded by the fact that none of the PCs will
switch between 10/100 except at power-up, whereas the switch appears
to do that at any time.

I don't see why that would be a problem.