Upgrading Network not sure how to set it up without creating a bottle neck

So, I'm going to be picking up an Asus AC5300, within a month. The only problem is it only has 4 lan ports. I think I definitely need a switch, since I have some consoles as well and they all have shitty wireless. It would also let my desktop and eventual NAS have better file transfer rates, by wiring everything up. I'm guessing I probably need a switch of some type. I don't really know much about switches. The first and second ports of the AC5300 support port aggregration, so I'm guessing that's how I should connect the switch to the router. Other than that it would be ideal if the switch could support 2 to 3 devices with port aggregation, so I can hook my pc, router, and eventual NAS with the best possible transfer rates.

Netgear XS712T seems pretty good, and I believe the ports can all be aggregated. Are there any other switches I should look at that are worth considering?

Ok, 1400$ for a switch is a bit steep.

It comes down to what you need.

What type of data will be stored on the NAS and how many devices will be accessing it at the same time?

If you plan to store movies/music you don't need more then 1Gbps over the lan.

If you plan to edit video over the network then the port aggregation will come in handy.

I would say, get yourself a 16 Port gigabit D-Link switch, you just plug it in and it works

You should be fine with a 1Gb/s switch. 10Gb/s over copper is extremely expensive and would cause the speed of the drives in your NAS/PC to be the bottle neck.

1Gb/s allows for transfer speeds up to 126MB/s which is faster than most mechanical drives, however, if you're planning on having an SSD array or a raid 10 then I guess you should go for a 10Gb/s switch.

Also, why would you like port aggregation on a 10Gb/s switch? I assume that the interfaces on the NAS and your PC will be 10Gb/s also, so if you were to aggregate two interfaces you would have a theoretical bandwidth of 20Gb/s which could support file transfers of 2500MB/s which is far faster than most drives, including PCI SSDs.

Oh wow, I misread the switch. Thought it was 195. Yeah, 1,400 is too much. Plus, it's probably pretty loud.

you can get some switches cheaply from ebay. If you want to go nice, and almost rock solid get fiberoptic switch and plastic fiber.

still you should be fine with 1Gig Ethernet, (cat5e or cat6.) would be awesome to play with 2 interfaces using bdu - but don't expect cheap switches to support that.

I recommend netgear and trendnet.

Netgear is pretty much rebrand cisco,
Trendnet is using Atheros chips

1 Like

Think I'll just pick up one of the cheap switches. When I build my bad ass server / Nas. I'll throw down for something a bit nicer.

If you're going to use link aggregation you only need it on the server port as it won't be used by the client devices. If you don't want to bottle neck the network I was connect the router to a switch and then connect the rest of the devices to the switch and not use the other ports on the router, except maybe for low bandwidth devices or for devices which only need internet access.

If you do want to use link aggregation you will also need a managed switch, but you should do some reading about it because it doesn't double your speed, it only gives you a bandwidth increase when there are multiple devices accessing it.

The aggregated ports just get priority on the devices bandwidth?

For that you want to look at QoS, which you will also need a managed switch for.

Link aggregation allows you to have multiple links sharing a single IP. But this doesn't mean you have a 2gbps link but two 1gbps links. So if you have two devices accessing the server they can both get up to 1gbps of bandwidth each, but a single device would still only be able to get 1gbps, not 2.

Depending on what it is you are trying to do, your best bet without getting into advanced configurations.


Then from the ASUS

LAN Port 3/4 --> Consoles
LAN Port 1 --> SWITCH --> All the computer stuff
This way, most (if not all) of your NAS/computer traffic stays in the switch.
The only time traffic leaves the switch is if it goes to the internet.

The consoles will be aware of the rest of the network, but won't normally be throwing traffic into the switch. Unless you were using them to stream media.

1 Like

I'm mainly, wiring everything through a wired connection to get the best up and down speeds for each. (wireless on consoles isn't ideal) getting the switch, so I could plug the consoles in with the rest of the devices on the network.

Are you looking to get everything access to your NAS, or the internet?

Just the Internet. I haven't even built the NAS yet. I Also kind of want to go way overkill on the NAS, so that's not happening anytime soon.

Alright, got everything set up and it works fairly well for the most part. I'm only having one issue. rsync backups to the external hard drive run only at about 7 MiB/s. I think I should be able to get faster transfer speeds than that.

I can't see the output of dd on the router, as busy boxes version doesn't give a print out. I'm guessing entware has a more feature complete version of dd, but I don't know which package has that. I added swap space, enabled jumbo frames, and tried playing around with different mtu values on both local and router ports with no luck. I even tried disabling reducing USB 3.0 interference to see if that might improve things. Oh, I also turned QoS on, and have the router setup to cache to ram.

Any ideas?

Rsync is slow sometimes, not sure why probably the integrity checking. Try just doing a copy and compare the speed.

From what I've read around it could be the ssh tunneling.

It could just be that the router isn't fast enough to handle the encryption used by SSH and the integrity checking used by rsync. I've also had slow experiences with it while transferring over samba to an ext4 disk but then it was fast when transferring back to a xfs disk. So it could also be the file system. But that's a somewhat anecdotal explanation for why it was slow.

Switched from SSH to NFS, and it's already going faster without tuning.

Netgear is rebranded Cisco? WOW. Talk about uneducated. You'll need to prove that to me and you won't be able to. Cisco is it's own thing and own ASICS. Nothing at all to do with netgear.

sorry meant linksys.