rbw wrote: > Also don't use the uplink port on the switch... > (See below)
yes, see below.. > > Lan Barnes wrote: >> Thanks. I'll dig in my parts box. >> >> On Sat, September 8, 2007 1:55 pm, Brad Beyenhof wrote: >>> If you're just adding ports, and you're not interested in segmenting >>> your network at all, it would probably be better to use a hub instead >>> of a switch. >>> >>> -- >>> Brad Beyenhof, Systems Administrator >>> UC San Diego, Laboratory of Cognitive Imaging >>> >>> >>> On 9/8/07, Lan Barnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> I want to add ports to my wireless router. Both wireless and switch >>>> have >>>> been tested and work. >>>> >>>> This doesn't work: >>>> >>>> Cable modem >>>> | >>>> V >>>> d-link's "uplink" port >>>> ***** (wireless now works) >>>> A d-link regular port >>>> | >>>> V >>>> Switch's uplink port > > Make this (above) a regular port on the switch... > This will just pass through or repeat the connections below. rbw- I can't understand why you say this. On a non-autosensing switch (which I assume LB has), the uplink port can connect to the dlink with a straight-through cable .. or a "normal" port can connect to the dlink with a crossover cable. Were you possibly assuming his setup didn't work _because_ he had a crossover cable? > >>>> ***** >>>> Switch's regular ports >>>> | >>>> V >>>> Anything (cat 5) DOESN'T work > > The above should now work... > >>>> >>>> Is there something I'm missing here? >>>> >>>> -- Or maybe I am out-of-whack here? Am I? Regards, ..jim -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
