Windows Networking issues

Hey all,

Just a few queries regarding networking in windows (compatibility with xp and older versions, etc)...

1. I was told that Windows has a problem when networking more than five or six computers (something about the networking side of the OS not being up to scratch)...I find this hard to believe but I'm not sure, would Windows crash (xp being the server, older versions connected to it) when confronted with networking more than 5 PCs?

2. If the above networking problem lies with the way in which Windows networks PCs, would a network hub solve the problem? Instead of PCs connecting to each other, if they connected to a hub, would the network IP resolution issues be taken care of in the hub?

Thanks for any help/pointers on the above problems, I hate these general problems, just researching something for a friend.

Thanks and happy new year to you all

seamus

I don't know what you mean by networking 5 PCs, if you're not using a hub or a router. Do you mean two network cards in each machine, connecting the machines in series.

If Windows had a problem networking more than 5 machines, it would have been ditched as an OS long long ago. Most major corporations, Universities and medium businesses wouldn't be able to use it.

SantaHoe

Instead of PCs connecting to each other, if they connected to a hub, would the network IP resolution issues be taken care of in the hub?

Well the standard hub isn't going to be dealing with anything like that, since it's more or less a "dumb" device that physically joins the wires.
But if your problem is the result of some crazy topography as seamus suggested, then it's definitely worth trying a hub, if only to simplify the whole setup.

Thanks for the responses, I'm not too sure as to the type of topography used, I'll see it tomorrow, I just need to know that it is probably just the way everything is set up, rather than any fault inherent in the Windows networking side of the OS, so, seamus, thanks for that, I know that I might be able to trick around with the setup.

So the hub is just simply a device through which multiple PCs "connect" to each other? It doesn't really do much else, rather than act as a simple adapter instead of fitting a load of PCs with network cards?
I was probably thinking of a router then, which, I'd imagine would be overkill for something the size of a 7 PC network, might try that, should I be unable to figure out an alternate setup.

Guys, thanks very much for your help, networking and the like wouldn't be my strongest subject

seamus

MoonHawk wrote:

So the hub is just simply a device through which multiple PCs "connect" to each other? It doesn't really do much else, rather than act as a simple adapter instead of fitting a load of PCs with network cards?

Essentially, yep. Each PC only needs one network card, connected to the hub. A packet from one PC is sent to all the others PCs, but only the relevant one responds.

In a serial setup, if PC1 wanted to communicate with PC7, then all machines would need to be configured to pass any data onto the next PC if it doesn't belong to it. If any other PC is down, it causes a break in the link - unless it's linked in a ring, but that still causes problems. With the the hub, PC1 sends out data for PC7, all machines receive the data, but only PC7 actually takes the data and responds. All other machines discard the data. This doesn't require nearly as much config as the other setup.

That's it basically anyway, we won't get into the technical bits.

I was probably thinking of a router then, which, I'd imagine would be overkill for something the size of a 7 PC network, might try that, should I be unable to figure out an alternate setup.

A router is always useful. For smaller networks like yours, you're better off (moneywise) with multifunction routers that do firewall/gateway/DHCP/mail serving, on top of routing.

I may be wrong, but I'd say the most common setup for very small networks is
Internet connection -> Firewall/Router/DHCP Server -> Hub -> Computers.

seamus, thanks, that's cleared it up (in my head, at least ), with regard to the hub and the operation of it.

Just another quickie though (and this has been bugging me for a while, so I might as well try and clear it up now), hubs and switches? what are the differences?

Thanks for your help

SantaHoe

Hubs broadcast any signal it recieves to all other nodes connected to it, so if you were on a large network consisting only of hubs, there'd be needless congestion and anyone could "listen" to what the other PCs are doing.
A switch on the other hand only forwards packets to the node that it's intended for... also afaik it filters out corrupt packets, where a hub will just pass it on regardless.
You've also got things like VLANs where you can assign a set of ports/mac-addresses to belong to its own network, seperate from other networks on the same switch.
I've heard switches described as "the intelligent hub", which I suppose is the short and sweet version.

Guys, the responses have been great, thanks a lot.

Hope I'm not dragging this topic out, but I just saw the setup and there are hubs (only for 7 PCs, so it seems grand), but only 5 PCs, at any time, can be seen (the PCs that aren't seen are different each time), so I was wondering if that's the fault of Windows XP Home (that's what's used there)...it seems strange that there is a cutoff at 5, leading me to think that maybe the Home edition doesn't support networks after 5 PCs...does that sound right or stupid?

Also, would a dedicated server be beneficial over the standard home PC networked setup, as in robustness and use that for all the major data, such as SQL Manager? Or if I just installed Windows Prof, would the network work more smoothly?

I just think it's a bit of overkill to install an expensive server for 7 PCs.
Thanks again folks.

Capt'n Midnight

MoonHawk wrote:

1. I was told that Windows has a problem when networking more than five or six computers (something about the networking side of the OS not being up to scratch)...I find this hard to believe but I'm not sure, would Windows crash (xp being the server, older versions connected to it) when confronted with networking more than 5 PCs?

Microsoft charges more for Windows Server than for other versions and they also charge per client that connects to the Server. So they delibeatley hobble other versions of windows 95/98/ME/Workstation/Home/Pro
Mainly the license of these versions limits use to 5 or 10 connections - check the license for more details. Microsoftese is so obtuse that I can't remember if this is per seat or per concurrent client or what.