[00:53] *** toeshred has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 240 seconds) [00:54] *** toeshred has joined #arpnetworks [06:09] *** ziyourenxiang has joined #arpnetworks [06:09] *** ziyourenxiang has quit IRC (Changing host) [06:09] *** ziyourenxiang has joined #arpnetworks [07:09] *** jpalmer has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 265 seconds) [07:10] *** pjs has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 265 seconds) [07:11] *** jpalmer has joined #arpnetworks [07:11] *** pjs has joined #arpnetworks [07:11] *** pjs is now known as Guest97359 [07:43] *** mnathani_ has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection) [07:43] *** mnathani_ has joined #arpnetworks [08:00] *** mnathani_ has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection) [08:01] *** mnathani_ has joined #arpnetworks [08:42] *** ziyourenxiang has quit IRC (Quit: Leaving) [12:52] mnathani_: mercutio : it really depends on the lens. Some really good lenses are cheap, not because they are bad, but because they are simple the make. I love my Nikon f/1.8 50mm. [12:52] about $150 new [12:52] excellent Bokeh [12:53] is buying second hand dslr cameras a sensible idea? [12:54] it seems a lot of people who get heavy into photography have at least two cameras+phone [12:54] because nice dslr cameras aren't very convenient with their extra weight/size/etc. [13:42] @weather -v yyz [13:42] mnathani: Verbose results will be PM'd to you. [14:02] mercutio: it's about as sensible as anything second hand, i suppose [14:06] *** qbit has quit IRC (Quit: WeeChat 1.3) [14:29] *** qbit has joined #arpnetworks [14:52] so in my home, i've got a Cisco SG300-20 switch that i wire virtually everything up to. i've got 4 25' runs going behind my TV, soon to be 6 runs. i'm debating whether it's worth putting a SG300-10 back behind the TV and then bringing two cables back to the 20 port in a LAG. [15:48] link aggregation for home setups hardly ever makes sense [15:48] but in your situation having two cables over four cables does sound nice. [15:49] and considering you have cables and would need switch anyway, my main thinking point would be whether that requries a fanned switch or not. [15:49] i think the sg300 switches are fanless though? [15:50] yeah looks like they're fanless, i figure if it's not expensive you may as well. just don't expect to see much benefit from link aggregation [15:51] i was curious how much latency difference there was from having an extra switch in the mix. and i got about 5us extra with gigabit, so even latency isn't likely to be a real concern. [16:15] the switch is really just to reduce the number of runs [16:15] so i don't think i'd benefit much [16:16] one of the runs is my internet uplink, so my crazy thought was to stick it in an isolated VLAN [16:16] ^with the router [16:16] but that seems ... wasteful [16:16] That's what she said!! [16:16] but it might justify LAG? [16:27] sticking internet in isolated vlan makes sense [16:28] well it means it doesnt' get all the random broadcast traffic etc. [16:28] i'm trying to find a cheap switch with lag :) [16:28] so far my best bet seems to be hp ps1810-8g [16:28] That's what she said!! [16:28] most of the cheap semi-managed switches don't do LAG [16:29] your internet connection could benefit from prioritisation at least. [16:30] like say you have 100 megabit internet, and gigabit lan, and you transfer files over gigabit lan, you want your internet to stay going up to 100 megabit. [16:30] whereas for the lan traffic you'd basically always want it to go to 900 megabit, and not be impacted. [16:30] but from that pov you could just run two cables - one for the internet connection, and one for the switch with normal traffic. [16:31] and in a home situation if you ever have a cable issue or such you can physically go and reroute stuff, to go via the switch.. [16:35] personally i don't worry about traffic interfering sharing the same lan port with internet and lan btw. [16:36] the only host that tends to send at fast lan speeds is the connection internet teminates on, which only has gigabit,and i just run fq_codel on that single port and am fine with it. [16:37] because i have fileserver and internet on the same host.. [16:39] and my optimisation that i'm consdering is having lan connections just come directly into a computer [18:04] I do internet cable into one port in switch ( vlan x) and then all my internal boxes vlan xx and then a small nuc with centos + kvm and I use one virtual for firewalling between the two vlans. Very neat setup with a fanless 8 port gig Juniper switch. [18:27] finding good cheap managed 8 port switches seems difficult [18:28] i ordered that 8 port hp one, as i found it cheap here, and at least has lacp [18:29] all the older 24 port etc cheap managed switches are all kind of power hungry and noisy and so not really suitable for home use. [18:30] the whole green for idle ports came in on unmanaged switches a few years ago, which brought power requirement down quite a bit [18:38] my juniper does everything the bigger models does.. :) very neat.. also has SFP ports.. [18:39] got one where my internet fiber comes in and one in my officeroom so I have a trunk between :) [18:44] I use them for CPE for my customerlinks just perfect small fanless unit. [18:54] sounds expensive :) [22:21] mercutio: how many ports do you need? [22:21] JC_Denton: i'd like like 12. [22:21] but i'm getting like 8 [22:22] i can always use two switches [22:22] Netgear M4100 has a good, fanless 12 port [22:23] the Cisco SG300-10 is also nice but it only has 10 [23:06] does it do link aggregation? [23:06] sg300-10 is expensive [23:13] and the netgear seems 10x as expensive as the hp 8 port i got :) [23:16] actually that switch doesn't look too bad if getting non poe version [23:16] if it just came down in cost a little.. [23:18] they all do LAG [23:18] check amazon [23:18] both the Cisco and the Netgear frequently go on sale [23:19] i need >12 ports and wanted fanless so I opted for the 20 port version of the Cisco [23:24] but the reason i wanted a LAG is that so anything "behind the TV" couldn't saturate a single uplink [23:28] problem is that lag doesn't really solve that [23:29] amazon isn't often good for switches to here :( [23:29] but there were some cheap netgear switches on ebay from china [23:29] i meant the switch's uplink to the lan [23:30] problem is that if you have minor background traffic it's easy for one port to congest one half of the lag [23:32] could always designate one half of it for the wan uplink traffic [23:32] yeah you could trunk the wan traffic on separate vlan [23:32] but then you may want to do the same at the other end to [23:32] err wan traffic on different port with just it's vlan [23:33] and s/to/too/ [23:33] and so you end up thinking that you may as well just run a parallel cable for wan [23:33] that said i suspect those switches do prioritisation as well. [23:35] or i could just run the additional 25' runs to my main switch [23:37] http://www.ebay.com/itm/Netgear-ProSafe-M4100-D12G-Managed-Switch-12-x-1000Base-T-Layer-2-/131522144942?hash=item1e9f54aaae:g:ApMAAOSwpdpVZFPS [23:37] this sems like good price [23:46] m4100 is actually slightly layer 3 it seems. [23:46] yep, both it and the SG300 are [23:46] i think the m4100 has better VACLs too [23:46] wouldn't be surprised if they're the same chip [23:47] i really want to play with 802.1x trunk ports, but the SG300 lacks support :( [23:47] ahh my cheap 24 port switch has 802.1x [23:47] ECS2000-26T [23:48] but does it allow the ports themselves to be supplicants [23:49] e.g., the switch has creds to auth to another switch [23:49] and become a trunking port [23:49] ohhh [23:49] probably not [23:50] the high end ciscos do [23:50] but ugh, fans [23:50] it also has a terrible web interface