Star topology question...

[itsmewhoelse]

Wesley, obviously very embarrassed to ask, says...

Today I went to see a client that has a LAN configured to a star topology or a star hybrid. They don't like it ( I wonder why ) so I need to change it to a Peer-2-Peer. The question is how? It's been so long since I've even discussed one, let alone see one, that have I totally forgotten anything about them, except that they're a major pain in the crack-in-the-back. Can anyone help me bring back old memories, painfull as they might be? And, no, I'm not talking about the time I took a big time *** whoopin' from that scrawny one armed kid at the fillin' station, either.: eek
Damn, that boy was quick!

TIA,

Wesley

[Gabriel]

Star Topology - Usaually refers to Network with Hub/Switch. All computers are connected to one Central location (E.g Hub).
BUS Topology + Peer-to-Peer Networking - Every computer is connected to the Neighbour computer.
This topology is recommended to a network with less than 10 compuyters because more computerrs will be Extremely slow.

In our days we don't use this Topology Much because it has no ability to Grow. And it Extrememly Difficult to Maintain.

Therefore I too Don't Advice to Go on this topology.

Good Luck
Gabriel

[Larommi]

[quote]Originally posted by itsmewhoelse:
<strong>Wesley, obviously very embarrassed to ask, says...

Today I went to see a client that has a LAN configured to a star topology or a star hybrid. They don't like it ( I wonder why ) so I need to change it to a Peer-2-Peer. The question is how? It's been so long since I've even discussed one, let alone see one, that have I totally forgotten anything about them, except that they're a major pain in the crack-in-the-back. Can anyone help me bring back old memories, painfull as they might be? And, no, I'm not talking about the time I took a big time *** whoopin' from that scrawny one armed kid at the fillin' station, either.: eek
Damn, that boy was quick!

TIA,

Wesley</strong><hr></blockquote>

You can do *****peer in a star topology. You are just eliminating a server and putting the work and file managment load on the workstations. Gabriel broke it down pretty well, but I am going to add that running star with cat5 is faster and easier to maintain than Bus. The reasons are if a workstation goes down it goes down, There is less guessing where it went down. Then there is the matter of cabling, and reworking the cabling.

I guess the question to ask is why the change? Is there a specific reason to make your network less efficiant and harder to maintain?

[WesFlash]

My 2 cents.
I am NOT a network admin. I still don't have A+ yet. I have a peer to peer network at home with 4 computers connected to a DSL modem using a Linksys 5 port 10/100 switch. I used to have it connected using a 5 port 10mbps hub, but the set up was the same. It all started with two NIC's and a cross over cable, which then grew and grew. This is mostly from my home experience and it may be too basic. So, if you feel that this begins to start to make you feel insulted, then please stop before you get irate at somone trying to start with the simple stuff. I am asuming a mix of Win9x computers are in the mix, but it should work for NT and 2K as well.

I reccomend using IPX/SPX, though many would say otherwise, to make sure you at least have the computers on the same network. Check computer names, and make them unique enough to locate easily. Once you can see computers with IPX/SPX enabled, get rid of it. Now for the fun part, TCP/IP.
Make certain to use the same workgroup and subnet mask on all computers, if they are to all share with each other. Increment the IP addresses to make set up easier and simpler to trouble shoot. (192.168.0.1, 192.168.0.2, 192.168.0.3........)
Now you need to work on sharing for each computers assets such as the hard drive, cdroms, floppy drives, etc.
To throw a monkey wrench into the works, if you are to use Internet Connection Sharing (ICS) then it changes a bit, but not drasticly.

[rrockey]

Hmmm, why start with Ipx/Spx just to remove it later? I don't get it.
But anyway, the term peer to peer network has nothing to do with the topology. Larommi is correct. Think of it simply as "No server".\
No server to log into...
No server to retrieve policies from...
No server to store files... etc...

For about 1-5 users it isn't a bad setup.
\Beyond that you need to start thinking of security, which a peer-to-peer has very little of.

[WesFlash]

I mentioned IPX/SPX only because if you mess up with setting up TCP/IP and you can't verify that the setup is working, how do you not know that it couldn't be a problem with the hub/switch/router? Like i mentioned before, I was going simple. I can't tell you how much trouble I would have gone through if it were not for IPX/SPX letting me know my physical connections di work. I was playing Delta force and Diablo, which preferred IPX/SPX for LAN, with my wife. When I tried games that used TCP/IP, they wouldn't work. I knew the network worked, so it was my TCP/IP set up. My problem was not knowing how to set it up and trying to figure it out on my own. I spent two weeks before I finally realized the subnets were different. Once that was fixed, then I could play TCP/IP games. The IPX/SPX step can be ignored, but it helps if you know nothing of networking and just bought a networking kit with sparse, or no setup instructions. Ever wonder why those network in a box kits ALWAYS have the user install IPX/SPX? I think I just explained it.

[rrockey]

Yes, delta force is the only reason to install ipx/spx. :)