What exactly do you get to manage with a managed switch?

Switch partitioning, vlans, QOS, etc.

-David

Yeah, probably stuff you don't need to worry about at home (or even in a small business) unless you're a real geek about it. ;)

Not sure you'll run across this in 24-port switches, but at least in 48-port models a particularly confusing term is "stackable". This has nothing to do with physically stacking up the boxes and everything to do with connecting switches together to make them manage as one large switch.

If you need that in your house you must be Bill Gates. :D

To build a Oracle RAC environment at home of course :)

http://www.oracle.com/technology/pub...gr2_iscsi.html

Video and photo editing. I keep my media on a NAS.

Right now, my network is segmented between a few wireless segments. One of the segments, which contains my editing computer, NAS and laptop, is gigabit. I use Netgear switches and find them almost reliable. They are, however, cheap. :)

They are out there. They are expensive. If you really want one, I would look for a used one. There's a huge delta in price between unmanaged and managed switches plus the price increase you pay for a commercial grade switch vs one made for the home market.

But I agree with you. Most home users don't need managed switches. I don't.

-David

Hmm, looks around at the Cisco switch and router in the rack behind my desk ...

Then looks at the CCIE plaque on the wall, nods and smiles. Overkill maybe, but at least it works well :cool:.

Geek alert :p

Stupid question from a semi-geek: what is the advantage to running all of this wiring through the house over using a wireless router?

Speed. 802.11g maxes out at 54 megabits/second, 802.11n at 108 (and these are maximum speeds, actual speed will be less). 100BaseT ethernet is 100 megabits per second, and 1000BaseT (gigabit, which is what has been discussed here) is 1000 megabits per second. There are also security issues -- anything broadcast is potentially less secure than a hard-wired system.

Me think the same.. I'm still running my notebooks on the wireless
and there is next to nil need for GB (or 100mbps) switch as far as I'm
concerned.

ISO would do it.. but my backups generally run off hours using rsync.
No big deal.. they finish just fine on a wireless link (under 11mbps) or 100mbps
wired.


I'd assume there is no real need for a managed switch for a home
environment, and I can understand the need for a 24 ports requirement,
but you should re-evaluate the need for GB.

Most of the cheap GB switches do not have fast throughput to support
simultaneous fast connections (Most Ciscos do - but at a premium cost)

PS: For the low end, I generally use Netgear switches. They've served me well.

That all makes sense. I'm trying to decide whether to talk to my new home builder about running network cable throughout the new house.

Yeah, I was just thinking about that--most of the cheap stuff won't come close to running a gig on more than a port or three at a time.

Its always a good idea. I'd suggest picking a central location where
you can have all the cables terminated in a patch panel.

Go for it! ^

If I was building a new home or doing serious reconstruction, I would certainly have the cables run, it is probably fairly trivial at the time of construction (ca 500$) to do sensible runs. It will be a simple thing in a few years to do HDV over CAT6 no problem.