Alternatives to Networking Equipment

Tarandeep · Post by **Tarandeep** » Mon May 21, 2007 4:58 pm

Hi guys i have a quick question regarding networking, what are the alternatives of using the following a,

1. Media Converter
2. RJ46 Connectors
3. Wireless Router
4. Switches
5. Fibre Optic Cabling
6. Cat 6 Cabling

Your answers would be appreciated.

ErikD · Post by **ErikD** » Mon May 21, 2007 9:14 pm

What do you mean alternatives? If you want to build a network you can't really go and replace all of those things. Or do you mean before they came along?

Genesis · Post by **Genesis** » Tue May 22, 2007 4:07 am

Tarandeep wrote:Hi guys i have a quick question regarding networking, what are the alternatives of using the following a,

1. Media Converter
2. RJ46 Connectors
3. Wireless Router
4. Switches
5. Fibre Optic Cabling
6. Cat 6 Cabling

Your answers would be appreciated.

1. Media Converter - Transistors converting smart serial to standard serial ?
2. RJ46 Connectors - RJ45* ?
3. Wireless Router - Access Points
4. Switches - Hubs, but don't use them if you can get a switch
5. Fibre Optic Cabling - Gigabyte Ethernet, but stick with the fiber
6. Cat 6 Cabling - Category 5e Cable

Hope it helps

Tarandeep · Post by **Tarandeep** » Tue May 22, 2007 7:46 am

hey thanks a lot youve been a big help!

ErikD · Post by **ErikD** » Tue May 22, 2007 7:43 pm

Genesis wrote:1. Media Converter - Transistors converting smart serial to standard serial ?
2. RJ46 Connectors - RJ45* ?
3. Wireless Router - Access Points
4. Switches - Hubs, but don't use them if you can get a switch
5. Fibre Optic Cabling - Gigabyte Ethernet, but stick with the fiber
6. Cat 6 Cabling - Category 5e Cable

Hope it helps

An access point is in no way an alternative to a router. These are two totally different devices that perform two different functions. There really is no overlap here. A router allows you to move data between two different networks. An access point connects wireless clients to a wired network.

Same thing with switches and hubs, I wouldn't consider them alternatives as they perform very different functions. A switch is a smart device, a hub isn't.

Genesis · Post by **Genesis** » Tue May 22, 2007 9:06 pm

ErikD wrote:An access point is in no way an alternative to a router. These are two totally different devices that perform two different functions. There really is no overlap here. A router allows you to move data between two different networks. An access point connects wireless clients to a wired network.

Same thing with switches and hubs, I wouldn't consider them alternatives as they perform very different functions. A switch is a smart device, a hub isn't.

Hmm somewhat erik, see you can build your own router using linux and any point that you can physically connect to is an actual access point. You probably thought i was referring to an access point from linksys ( the stand alone boxes ).

Edit: Switches do infact perform better than hubs, thats why i told him to stick with switches, as hubs do not perform micro segmentation of the network nor do they create virtual circuits between connections. Hubs only forward data and therefore expand your broadcast domain as a whole, this leaves you prone to packet loss and definite downfall of network performance.

ErikD · Post by **ErikD** » Tue May 22, 2007 9:45 pm

Umm, no. An access point isn't anything that you connect to a router. And even if it were, how would that be an alternative to a router? I full well understand what a router does, and so what if you can make a Linux based router? I have done it, it is still just a router. A Linksys cable/dsl/wireless router, a Linux distro (Smoothwall, IPOP, etc.), Cisco, Juniper, Nortel, and many more are all still routers.

The difference between a hub and switch is huge. I wouldn't consider one an alternative to the other. Which is my whole point, as far as I am concerned much of what you listed isn't actually an alternative. Even for the fiber, fiber comes over many of the limitations of copper. So it isn't really an alternative, it is a whole different technology used for a whole different reason.

Genesis · Post by **Genesis** » Wed May 23, 2007 1:50 am

Different technology, but it infact is an alternative, if you dont have fiber you can use copper to receive a connection, its not gonna be as good but its still an alternative, and this argument is over. i was trying to help the guy, instead of trying to start somewhat of a flame, why not just answer his original question?

ErikD · Post by **ErikD** » Wed May 23, 2007 8:47 am

It is about giving accurate information. Fiber can be used over longer distances, and other conditions where copper fails. This is why I can't consider copper a true alternative, you use them for different reasons.