Topology and Cabling for Prosumer Home Network

[hlofgren]

G'day,

this is my forst post at SNB. Please allow me to thank you for publishing a great website with useful content.

I will soon be starting to completely gut and refurbish a 5-storey house. In the process I want to install a wired high speed network. The network expense is small in comparison to the overall refurbishment so I am not concerned with cost, only with speed. Below is a brief description of the anticipated network and its end usage.

a) The basement will house a "server room" with NAS units, network equipment and physical broadband access

b) The network will have 5 users with individual computers. One user streams realtime financial data 8-10 hours per day. All computers share storage on NAS. All computers are backed up via network. NAS streams HD media to 3-4 media players in property. Surveillance cameras store CCTV footage on NAS.

c) Each floor will have 8 wired Ethernet access points (40 total). In addition there will be 2-5 outdoors access points.

d) I want the physical network to at least support 1GB speed

e) I want the network to be scaleable in the sense that equipment can be changed and upgraded without rebuilding the whole thing.

At this stage I have three questions where your input would be valued.


A. Topology

With ~45 Ethernet access points I can see at least 2 ways of building the network:

(i) Run 45 cables to the basement and buy a 48-port switch
(ii) Have an 8-port switch on each floor and connect each of them to an 16-port switch in the basement (some additional ports for NAS etc).

Comments on benefits/drawbacks of ether solution?


B. Cabling

I have been contemplating four alternatives:

(i) Cat6 1 Gigabit cabling
(ii) Cat6 with optical fibre run in parallell for unknown future needs/use
(iii) Cat6a 10 Gigabit cabling
(in) Cat6a with optical fibre run in parallell for unknown future needs/use

One can of course contemplate combinations, e.g. Cat6a/optical for switch to switch connection and Cat6 for switch to wall socket etc.

Any thoughts on this you could share with me?


C. Outdoors access points

Anything I should be mindful of in relation to outdoors connections? (Will be used for surveillance cameras plus a wireless accesss point in garden).


I would be most grateful for any thoughts you could share with me.


Best regards,

hlofgren

 

[thiggins]

A. Topology
With ~45 Ethernet access points I can see at least 2 ways of building the network:

(i) Run 45 cables to the basement and buy a 48-port switch
(ii) Have an 8-port switch on each floor and connect each of them to an 16-port switch in the basement (some additional ports for NAS etc).

The layout you use depends on traffic patterns. If most traffic tends to be local to each floor, then the local switch is the way to go. I'd go with switches that can support link aggregation so that you can have 2 Gbps (assuming 10/100/1000 switches) pipes from the local to central switch.

B. Cabling
I have been contemplating four alternatives:

(i) Cat6 1 Gigabit cabling
(ii) Cat6 with optical fibre run in parallell for unknown future needs/use
(iii) Cat6a 10 Gigabit cabling
(in) Cat6a with optical fibre run in parallell for unknown future needs/use

One can of course contemplate combinations, e.g. Cat6a/optical for switch to switch connection and Cat6 for switch to wall socket etc.

If you're going to go 10 G, then you probably want to run fiber, although I defer to others more knowledgeable.
For Gigabit, CAT 5e is fine, 6 if you want to pay more for essentially no benefit.

C. Outdoors access points
Anything I should be mindful of in relation to outdoors connections? (Will be used for surveillance cameras plus a wireless accesss point in garden)

I'd use self-contained units with PoE and higher-gain antennas. EnGenius and Ubiquiti make some suitable units.

 

[teknojnky]

I think I would go:

- 10g/fiber trunk running from basement up to each floor/switch
- optional secondary trunk: 2 gig-e for redundancy and/or dedicated bandwidth for backup jobs/cctv
- switch per floor (if you need 8 usable wired ports, you will need a switch with 8 + trunk port(s)).

 

[MadKing]

Since you have not much computer on each floor, I would probably go for one big 48 switch. That would reduce the cost of having to pay for 10g equipement, even if cost isn't a concern here. Also you will not need to have redurancy link or having to deal for spanning tree.

If you do it that way, just make sure you have the space for having 48 bulk of cable passing somewhere and have a distance less that 100m.

Also check for a switch that support POE for the access point and camera.

 

[hlofgren]

Food for thought, indeed. Thanks for answering and it was interesting to see your slightly different views on the preferrable network topology.

On the back of your thoughts I mapped out the expected dominant traffic direction and crude bandwidth requirement for each socket. The result can be found in the attached .pdf - please have a look.

It feels like one could find a middle ground between the two topology extremes based on usage and bandwidth needs (I really dread the thought of 48 cables running to the basement). Here's one idea that sprung to mind:

* All 23 sockets on ground and basement floor plus the 3 link aggregated dual-channel sockets on 1st and 3rd floor connect directly to the basement switch for streaming purposes. The basement switch still needs to be a 48- port variant to accommodate NAS etc.

* The remaining 11 sockets on 1st, 2nd and 3rd floor connect to a 16-port switch on the 1st floor, which connects to basement switch per teknojnky's suggestion (fibre + 2 gig-e redundancy)

Admittedly I do end up with an extra switch but that's a price I may be willing to pay to get rid of half the cabling to the basement.

Questions:

a) Is the above concept sensible or am I either overcomplicating things or building myself into a corner?

b) What kind of network management problems (.g. tree spanning) would I need to address with a setup similar to above?


Best regards,

H.

 

[teknojnky]

a) sounds like a good compromise to me. I would go with cat 6a cable vs plain cat6 just for peace of mind, I assume you don't want to have to ever rewire in the future.

b) spanning tree generally is not really a big issue when your using layer 2 or 3 switches as they are typically designed for having redundant links and keeping them loop free. Google/wiki have far more details if you want to understand STP/redundant links/trunking further.

c) it wasn't mentioned, but something to consider in your port count, is if any client PC's may have/need/want dual gig-e NIC's and want to run bonded.

If I was wiring up my house, I would go double cat6a cable/ports from wall plate to switch. This would cover if I wanted to bond a single client, or PC and network printer, or if company comes over they can plug right in without having to have insert a small switch to multiplex the single port or rely on wireless.

If you want to keep your switch port count down, you could still run the dual cable wiring, but only plug in one cable until/unless you needed both.

 

[MadKing]

Spanning tree protocol is to add another another road if a cable is cut somewhere, so you need to put more cable between them. This is use in business and for critical environnement. You also need to have switch (cicso-like one) that support it. In your case you probably don't need it. Also Link Aggregation are supported on that kind of managed switch. What are the plan on model you are willing to buy ?

You have to choose if you need spanning tree, 10g , Link Aggregation, vlan on your switch. If you need them the price will hike really fast (cicso, juniper ...).

You can still find managed switch with somes features but not all at a decent price for 2 x 24 port switch. Just make sure you check the spec first to see what it's support.

In you case the 2 * 24 switch or one 48 switch i what i would do. Having a big 48 swtich would have less headace to have to deal with feature but you will have to deal with a lot of cable.

 

[Breakingcustom]

48 cables....that's nothing. I don't see the problem with running 48 cables to the basement other than cable cost. If you don't plan on buying like Berk-Tek/Panduit cable which can run $600+ a box. Also a thing to consider is the HVAC environment. If you are running in a plenum airspace you'll want to get plenum cable in case of a fire. Riser otherwise. There is a significant price difference.

My suggestion is to put up a patch panel in the basement. I might of missed you saying that, but you can find patch panels about anywhere. I just bought a house and rewired it with Cat6 and Cat5e (for phone). Each outlet has a data/phone/coax and runs to my basement where I have a 24 port patch panel, 110 block for phone, and my coax splitter.

The nice thing with patch panels is the ability to disconnect and reconnect. I don't like wiring directly to the switch. You can pick up 1ft patch cables from Monoprice for dirt cheap. I bought $50 of them for like $27 with shipping.

I think going 10g is way too much. We've done work for medium to large businesses that don't use 10g.

 

[lifespeed]

You should definitely use CAT6A for future-proofing and possible 10GB expansion. If you want to really do the future proof you might look into fiber optic, or better yet, just leave a pull line in your conduit spanning the floors.

CAT6A price premium over CAT5E is minor considering the labor involved.

While 48 cables to the basement may sound daunting, remember that the hard part is getting them through the walls on each floor to the riser conduit to the basement. And that is the part you have to do regardless of which approach you take.

Having a single big switch in the basement could save you money and configuration time/trouble, especially when 10GB is expensive for the first few years.

 

[crashnburn]

I have 2 floors and have a 24 port GigE with Cat 6 cabling.

Minimize the switches you have to use... wire it all down in a STAR to the central switch.. be it 48 wires if need be.

I second the Patch cable thing. I dont have it.. but should help.