I looked through my archives from past discussions on this matter, and found the attached e-mail from a member, I hope it helps....
Adrian -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Mike Parrot Sent: 20 October 2001 21:36 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [hlds] Other Questions from: HLDS Win2k Server/ Networking Post Thanks for all the clarification about switches and hubs, but could anyone give me any words of wisdom on the heart of my earlier post? I would sure appreciate your help on any of the rest of it. Thanks, Mikee ========Please Note: This is a Duplicate of my first post========= I'm not as experienced as most of you, but I set up a simple network with a full T-1 coming through the Intel Express 8220 Router (vs. a Cisco...it was only $700 new, has the CSU/DSU built in, and a slick "Device View" menu interface) to a 650 Athlon w/ 256 RAM running Win2k Server (not Advanced Server) with 2 NIC's. I put the higher quality 3Com Etherlink Server (3CR990SV97 model) as the LAN NIC, and set this up with "Client for MS Networks," "File and Print Sharing" and "TCP/IP" protocols with the settings Manuel had also said below. I then use the 3Com "3C905C-TX-M" NIC for the WAN, but only have "TCP/IP" enabled (no Client for MS Networks or File/Print Sharing) to protect the Server PC and insulate the LAN. I also run BID & NAV on both the Server and LAN PC. These are all networked to a 10/100 SMC switch (I heard that a switch is faster than a HUB...but am still confused about what the differences and indications of Hubs vs. Switches is), where the router CAT cable connects into. =======Note: Now I'm glad I chose a switch!!=================== Because I know that Win2k Server has much faster, and allows more simultaneous connections, I put my HLDS on the Win2k Server box, and running it with a custom user profile. I also Ghosted and image in case it gets hacked. I can restore it back from the 3 CD's (I have lots of maps!) pretty quick. I have nothing else on the Win2k Server PC. How does this setup sound to you? The pings for people are superb....a lot are getting pings under 50! I am also now running a second HLDS, both running as shortcuts..not as services. So far the most people I have had connected to both games running is about 35...and no crashes or other problems have come up running this for about a week straight (have not had to reboot, or restart, etc.). Sorry this is so long...I'm getting to the heart of my question, but another thought I had was at some point to get another (a third) dedicated (used) PC box from someone, and use that as a dedicated game server, running Win2k Pro, put 2 NIC's in it, also plug them both into the switch, and then configure one NIC to directly connect to the Internet (only using TCP/IP) with another one of the block of public IP's. Then have the 2nd NIC connect in to the LAN so I could have configuring access from the network. If I did that I would also likely get one of those keyboard/mouse/monitor A/B switches so I didn't have to put up another monitor. I guess my real question is: Is there anything wrong with having the Win2k Server box that is also the gateway NAT routing PC run the HLDS games if that's all I have on it? People are getting excellent pings, with many under 50! I understand that the Server PC will get a bit more "stressed" if I do file transfers, surfing, emailing, play HL as client, etc. from the LAN PC I have now...but I thought that most all of these LAN requests just get passed right through the Win2K Server box out to the Internet. Is there any point to setting up a third PC as a dedicated game server which would have a less powerful OS on it? Again, my apologies for this being so long, and many thanks for any feedback. ==============End of Previously posted note==================== _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Actually, If one over looks some of the attitude in the list content, there is good conversation within it. Answer: Switch (regardless of the application) The only time I have ever seen a "hub" win the performance edge over a "switch" was when there was mis-configuration. I use my Protocol Analyzer pretty much every day in corporate world. I trouble shoot backbones as a living, so I kind of know what I'm talking about. A "hub" is shared media half-duplex all shared media is half duplex. This means that stations connected to it can't talk and listen at that same time. It also means that every station has to see, pickup, and process every packet on the wire, even it is not the intended recipient. Kind of like a conference call. Switches hook two ports directly together so the transmitting/listening stations can hold a private packet exchange session. While they exchange their packets, no one else on the switch has to see, pickup, or process those packets. Switches and Network Interface Cards come in a variety of flavors and standards. For example: A Netgear FA310 10/100 NIC card is plugged into a 3Com 12 port 10/100 SuperStack 1100. You set everything up for "Auto" everything. Then you test and find the performance is not so good. What you will see is different IEEE standards implemented. Auto-Sense (FA310) is NOT the same as "Auto-Negotiate" (3com). Strapping the NIC to 100 Full and the switch port to 100 Full yields performance levels you'd expect, regardless of the application. (That is a real world personal experience.) Also, if you are purely performance oriented and use a switch, use only cut-through switching not "intelligent" or "store-and-forward". The difference is pretty big. Cut-through allows the switch to look only at the destination mac address and forward the packet on. The other types of switching involve sampling some or all of the packets by buffering them up, breaking them open, checking the CRC, and them putting them back on the wire. One real easy mechanism for verifying mis-configuration is to look a port/nic counters. A full duplex configuration will never have a collision counter greater then zero. If you are running full duplex, or think you are, but there are collisions occurring, you have a mis-configuration. Cheers to all, Tom
