SG Broadband Community

This is my setup (I'll list what matters):

Connection: Comcast @Home, ran a lot of DSLReport connection tests, max I got was about 2Mb download, 500Kb upload. Pretty good. All LAN connections are running at 10Mb.

Cabling:
3 clients connected to the hub (3 cables each), which the hub contains max of 4 ports. 1 cable from that hub (making that total of 4 cables using all 4 hub ports) goes to the proxy computer connecting into one of the FA310TX NIC. One cable from the second FA310TX NIC connects to the cable modem. All cables are CAT5.

Proxy computer:
-Dedicated, no one uses it
-Windows Me
-Sygate 4.0 Home Networking software (NAT)
-Pentium 200MHz (o/c to 225MHz)
-Two Netgear FA310TX NICs (Internet/LAN)
-EN104TP Ethernet hub (Netgear, 10Mb)
-32 MB PC-100 RAM

Other computers (three of them):
OS: All WinMe
RAM: 64MB, 64MB, and 128MB
CPU: Celeron 400MHz, Celeron 400MHz, PIII 500E MHz
NIC: SMC (generic 10Mb), and some Davicom generic 10Mb, Netgear FA410TX.

The issue is that when the third computer starts to do something, latency starts to jump up, and fast when two other computers are doing something, especially gaming online. When the two computers are used to play games online, there's no problem. When the third computer starts to do something, especially surfing the web, the two computers that are playing games online starts to have latency issues. For instance, the two computers each get pings of about 80 ms throughout the game (Half-Life: Counter-Strike). When the third computer surfs the Internet, the latencies for those two computers jump as high as 2000 ms. Average is about 1000 ms. Ping dies down once the third computer stops doing Internet activities and resumes to the norm.

To me, it may sound normal, but I have doubts that it shouldn't be like this. Latency shouldn't jump that high. When one computer is playing online gaming and the second is surfing, ping barely jumps and not a threat to latency. It's just the third computer. Any third computer. It's not a specific computer. It just happens to whomever is using the third computer. I have tried many NAT softwares and it makes very to no difference at all. Sygate is the best that I found. Win98SE/WinMe's ICS was great at first, but then I found that it spikes the pings, and is horrible. Sygate seems to solve the two people connection, but now I need to solve when three clients are using the Internet.

Past issues were NICs in the proxy computer. I solved that part, and it made latency little bit lower when I switched from the SMC + FA310 to 2 FA310 in the proxy computer. As far as I know, generic NICs aren't going into the proxy. Also, other latency issues were squished by replacing Windows 9x/Me's ICS with Sygate 4.0 Home Networking. I have tried other proxy/NAT softwares, and doesn't improve latency problems.

Any comments/suggestions/more information needed are welcome.

My guess is your either maxing out your connection and/or network w/the third PC. Try setting up a 100mbps network w/a switch instead of a hub.

I too, have a dedicated server. It's used for ICS and file sharing on the LAN and I have no speed probs. My LAN is running at 100mbps in full-duplex mode. I use a Linky 5 port switch and Intel 100mbps NICs for connectivity.

Strange though, as bandwidth shouldn't be the problem. LAN transfer is about 600KB/s or so. Playing games online, which takes up about a few KB/s, max is about 10KB/s total + the third computer which can do anywhere from a few KBs to 100KB/s... I'll see what I can do about the hub. Dunno if getting a 100Mb hub would do. Try to avoid getting a switch, but then again, I might have to. Thanks for the reply. Appreciated.

Originally posted by glc1:
My guess is your either maxing out your connection and/or network w/the third PC. Try setting up a 100mbps network w/a switch instead of a hub.

I too, have a dedicated server. It's used for ICS and file sharing on the LAN and I have no speed probs. My LAN is running at 100mbps in full-duplex mode. I use a Linky 5 port switch and Intel 100mbps NICs for connectivity.

The switch will eliminate most of the problems you are having with latency. Your 2 biggest problems are with the hub and Sygate. The hub is forcing your internal network to run half-duplex, whereas the switch would create virtual circuits between nodes and able to transmit(TX)/recieve(RX) at the same time.

Whenever you introduce a device or software that is required to make a routing decision, this includes consulting routing tables or resolving internal IP's to global IP's, you inject latency into your network.

What makes things even worse in your network is the hub. All your machines are contending for the same bandwidth and causing collisions. As long as your bandwidth requirements are low you can pretty safely run a 2 node network on a hub w/o any visually measurable degradation in performance. The moment you add a 3rd machine into your half-duplex network you cripple it.

C.M.

BTW, to run in full-duplex, NICs that support full-duplex are required.

Thank you for the information, as all NICs are full-duplex capable and are 10/100 Mb. Of course, now I would need to get a switch.

Originally posted by glc1:
BTW, to run in full-duplex, NICs that support full-duplex are required.

I have no doubt about the switch solving my problem, but you said that I would have another problem: Sygate. It doesn't look much like a problem to me, but instead, 99% of the problem looks like the hub. Although running the LAN at 10Mb at half-duplex, would upgrading the hub to 100Mb at half-duplex solve it?

Right now, I would have my mind set on getting a switch soon, although I just want to know if a 100Mb hub connection would solve it (half-duplex of course).

Originally posted by C.M. Weaver:
The switch will eliminate most of the problems you are having with latency. Your 2 biggest problems are with the hub and Sygate. The hub is forcing your internal network to run half-duplex, whereas the switch would create virtual circuits between nodes and able to transmit(TX)/recieve(RX) at the same time.

Whenever you introduce a device or software that is required to make a routing decision, this includes consulting routing tables or resolving internal IP's to global IP's, you inject latency into your network.

What makes things even worse in your network is the hub. All your machines are contending for the same bandwidth and causing collisions. As long as your bandwidth requirements are low you can pretty safely run a 2 node network on a hub w/o any visually measurable degradation in performance. The moment you add a 3rd machine into your half-duplex network you cripple it.

C.M.

You will still be better off w/a swtich b/c it is "smarter" and has bandwidth dedicated to each port, hubs don't.

I got this one. It worked wonders for my LAN.

[This message has been edited by glc1 (edited 11-22-2000).]

Yes, I'd agree with you that a switch is the way to go, but I want to really know if a 100Mb hub would've solved the problem. I am still going with a switch anyways, instead of trying to get my hands on a 100Mb hub, as it isn't worth trouble for future expansions, etc.

Originally posted by glc1:
You will still be better off w/a swtich b/c it is "smarter" and has bandwidth dedicated to each port, hubs don't.

I got this one. It worked wonders for my LAN.

[This message has been edited by glc1 (edited 11-22-2000).]

Originally posted by HQH51:
Yes, I'd agree with you that a switch is the way to go, but I want to really know if a 100Mb hub would've solved the problem.

Probably not. I used a 100mbps Netgear hub before I had my Linksys switch and my LAN performance was terrible - lots of collisions.

A hub is not an intelligent device, it makes no forwarding decisions and propagates collisions through the network. The 100MB hub will not solve or even make your problem any less problematic.

I'm not saying that Sygate is your ultimate problem, only that it paired with the hub causes problems. Like I said before, limited bandwidth requirements won't have adverse effect on your bandwidth especially if you are running only 2 nodes. But the minute you toss that 3rd node in there your done. Any device that has to make a forwarding decision adds to the overall latency of the network.

C.M.

Thanks, that's what I wanted to hear (technically read).

Originally posted by C.M. Weaver:
A hub is not an intelligent device, it makes no forwarding decisions and propagates collisions through the network. The 100MB hub will not solve or even make your problem any less problematic.

I'm not saying that Sygate is your ultimate problem, only that it paired with the hub causes problems. Like I said before, limited bandwidth requirements won't have adverse effect on your bandwidth especially if you are running only 2 nodes. But the minute you toss that 3rd node in there your done. Any device that has to make a forwarding decision adds to the overall latency of the network.

C.M.