Is there a way to split a network in two?

Notice: Page may contain affiliate links for which we may earn a small commission through services like Amazon Affiliates or Skimlinks.

zicoz

Member
Jan 7, 2011
140
0
16
I'm having some issues with communication between my HTPCs and my TV-server, and I think it's because my network is too big for my router. The things I have in my "media network" consists of 3 HTPCs, 1 file server, 1 tv-server and 1 ripbox.

And on top of that there are a bunch of other computers and devices that do not need to be on the same network, laptops, desktops, phones, tablets, consoles and so on.

What do I need to do split the network in two, so it looks something like this?



The left side represents the media network and the right side represents everything else.

The right side has a lot more devices but there was no point in adding them to the schematics.

As you can see the Ripbox needs to be connected to both networks.
 

cactus

Moderator
Jan 25, 2011
830
75
28
CA
Using a different subnet for each group of computers will give you what you want.

With a single subnet network, the only "routing" going on is traffic to the internet. Traffic from one computer to another would only go through a switch. I would look to see if you have other problems in your network before you add the additional complexity of a second subnet. What problems are you seeing that makes you think the router is not up to the task?
 

Patrick

Administrator
Staff member
Dec 21, 2010
12,516
5,810
113
I would tend to agree with cactus. I have just over 200 active IPs at any given time due to STH and everything runs fine.
 

zicoz

Member
Jan 7, 2011
140
0
16
Well the biggest "proof" I have is that I rebooted my network this weekend and for a couple of days I Limited the size to just my media network + 2 PCs, and everything seemed to work fine, a couple of days later the when I had added all the other Devices to the network I started getting the same issue again, after showing my logs to the MediaPortal People who understand it I recieved the following answer.


The problem is with the communication between the client and server.


Failed to get a SDP description from URL rtsp://TV-Server:554/stream3.0 connect() failed: Unknown error

Check your networking and perhaps try using static IP addresses instead of hostnames.
 

cactus

Moderator
Jan 25, 2011
830
75
28
CA
Without having a DNS server, I have had hostnames be unreliable. I would agree with the tech support and move to using static IPs and maybe add the hostnames you want to use to the hosts file.
 

RimBlock

Active Member
Sep 18, 2011
837
28
28
Singapore
Well the biggest "proof" I have is that I rebooted my network this weekend and for a couple of days I Limited the size to just my media network + 2 PCs, and everything seemed to work fine, a couple of days later the when I had added all the other Devices to the network I started getting the same issue again, after showing my logs to the MediaPortal People who understand it I recieved the following answer.


The problem is with the communication between the client and server.


Failed to get a SDP description from URL rtsp://TV-Server:554/stream3.0 connect() failed: Unknown error

Check your networking and perhaps try using static IP addresses instead of hostnames.
Ok, quick primer as we do not know your experience level.

If we think of the system as a personal phone book.

The DNS server is the person holding the phone book, the host name is the persons name and the IP address is their telephone number. If you want to call someone then you can either use their telephone number directly (IP address) or you can ask the person holding the phone book (DNS server) for the number relating to the person you want to contact (Hostname).

In the case of most standard home setups, the phonebook holder is a person (machine) on their Internet service providers network and this holder needs to record lots of different sets of details for all the different people using the service and sometimes gets a bit confused. It then may have problems giving the correct address for a set machine.

Adding to this that a lot of setups also have DHCP which is like having the ability to change phone numbers (using the above analogy) on a regular basis and you have a greater chance of the phonebook holder missing entries / getting confused.

Some people fix this by having their own phonebook holder on their own network (personal DNS server) but this can cause different issues especially if not configured correctly.

Another possibility is that one of your machines is set to use a static IP address and is using the one assigned to your server or vice versa. If there are two machines on your network both using the same address then much confusion can ensue.

To check for this, go back to the last known config that worked (server and a few machines), verify it is working and then add a device to your network one at a time and verify after each addition. If an IP address clash is occurring then this should help you to find out which machine is clashing with your server and then you can try to narrow down why.

I would take the time to resolve the issue rather than trying to find a way around it as you could just hit the same problem again whatever solution is suggested.

Let us know how you get on.

RB

On most home networks I have dealt with, the DNS servers are the ISPs and, as Cactus has said, don't always work well when capturing the hostnames of your machines on your lan so the actual addresses (IP addresses) can be referenced for the communication to the physical computer.
 

truman

New Member
Dec 23, 2012
1
0
0
I have both LBs setup in Active-Passive. I am doing Layer 7 SSL offloading for my IIS servers. It was tricky getting the Layer 7 SSL offloading to work for our application.
 

brownjett

New Member
Jan 12, 2013
2
0
0
After the very important "here's how to get it all working" hints, I'd like to see benchmarks that show large and small block read and write performance at high queue depth for a storage server setup - one machine with disk serving up data to one or more client machines via various IB protocols to see which provides the best performance. Protocols: SMB, SDP, iSCSI, IPoIB, and maybe NFS. That's not asking too much is it?