• Post Your Servers v2: "Not my equipment, but..."
    811 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Demache;40156863]A connection is only as fast as the slowest device in the chain. However, if you have a 1 Gb switch, and a PC with a 1 Gb NIC, and another with a 10 Mb NIC, the 1 Gb NIC won't slow down to 10 Mb. Wireless is a little different, since everyone has to communicate the same since everyone connects to the same access point. However, as far as I know, I believe routers can support multiple network standards at the same time (like Wireless G and N at the same time).[/QUOTE] hmm. see, i want to take my house up to gigabit. we've got gigabit wall plugs (i know i know) a gigabit wireless N router and switch behind the TV a megabit router downstairs with the phone line serving DHCP. i have a wireless g megabit router upstairs. we also have a gigabit switch for the AV equipment. but since the main router with DHCP is only megabit, does this not mean if i was to send something from my computer to the TV it would be bottlenecked by the megabit router? forgive my ignorance, i know little about networking
[QUOTE=cueballv2themax;40156678]is it true that your network is only as fast as your slowest component?[/QUOTE] No, each physical connection will work at the speed of the slowest NIC, for example a gigabit device and a 10/100 device will communicate at 100m [B]but[/B] two gigabit devices on the same network would communicate at full gigabit speeds. It's true that a network hub can/will cause performance issues on a network but it's not to do with wire speed.
[QUOTE=XL5;40157033] It's true that a network hub can/will cause performance issues on a network but it's not to do with wire speed.[/QUOTE] Collisions EVERYWHERE
[QUOTE=cueballv2themax;40156899]hmm. see, i want to take my house up to gigabit. we've got gigabit wall plugs (i know i know) a gigabit wireless N router and switch behind the TV a megabit router downstairs with the phone line serving DHCP. i have a wireless g megabit router upstairs. we also have a gigabit switch for the AV equipment. but since the main router with DHCP is only megabit, does this not mean if i was to send something from my computer to the TV it would be bottlenecked by the megabit router? forgive my ignorance, i know little about networking[/QUOTE] If the connection from your computer must pass through that router serving DHCP to get to the TV, then yes, it will technically bottleneck it to 100 Mb/s speeds.
[QUOTE=Demache;40156863]A connection is only as fast as the slowest device in the chain. However, if you have a 1 Gb switch, and a PC with a 1 Gb NIC, and another with a 10 Mb NIC, the 1 Gb NIC won't slow down to 10 Mb. Wireless is a little different, since everyone has to communicate the same since everyone connects to the same access point. However, as far as I know, I believe routers can support multiple network standards at the same time (like Wireless G and N at the same time).[/QUOTE] Only if it supports dual-band.
Here's my NAS. [IMG]http://img.sekcobra.net/2013-04-04_18-35-53.png[/IMG]
Stop!
[QUOTE=Adelle Zhu;40159847]Stop![/QUOTE] Hammertime?
Whose bright idea was it to bring metro into server 2012? [img_thumb]http://i.imgur.com/sOkeCfJ.png[/img_thumb] And here I was, thinking Microsoft may have made a semi-decent server OS Back to Linux for me :v: (or at least server 2008, where it's needed)
[QUOTE=Akito8;40163909]Whose bright idea was it to bring metro into server 2012? [img_thumb]http://i.imgur.com/sOkeCfJ.png[/img_thumb] And here I was, thinking Microsoft may have made a semi-decent server OS Back to Linux for me :v: (or at least server 2008, where it's needed)[/QUOTE] I must be the only one to think it looks incredibly sexy
the gradients and colour scheme in that image make me want to vomit [editline]5th April 2013[/editline] plus the old as hell icons are the least fitting things in existance
It looks like some GUI from the 1990's.
[QUOTE=Akito8;40163909]Whose bright idea was it to bring metro into server 2012? [img_thumb]http://i.imgur.com/sOkeCfJ.png[/img_thumb] And here I was, thinking Microsoft may have made a semi-decent server OS Back to Linux for me :v: (or at least server 2008, where it's needed)[/QUOTE] Use powershell?
[video=youtube;B4VtNLl6Ca4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4VtNLl6Ca4[/video]
[QUOTE=MTMod;40169820][video=youtube;B4VtNLl6Ca4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4VtNLl6Ca4[/video][/QUOTE] Common first-look misconception
[QUOTE=Killervalon;40169911]Common first-look misconception[/QUOTE] Agreed, I have found Windows 8 to be just as productive as Windows 7. My only complaint is that certain older apps have compatibility issues. (NetBotz Advanced View crashes on start) Solved these problems with a Windows XP VM.
New thread, new server: [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/ABSrsOI.png[/IMG] Xeon X5560 @ 2.8ghz 2gb dedicated RAM 60GB HDD 800GB BW/month 10mbit port Located in Australia $15/month Running a TS3 server and a small tekkit lite server. Runs everything fine.
[QUOTE=Akito8;40163909]Whose bright idea was it to bring metro into server 2012? [img_thumb]http://i.imgur.com/sOkeCfJ.png[/img_thumb] And here I was, thinking Microsoft may have made a semi-decent server OS Back to Linux for me :v: (or at least server 2008, where it's needed)[/QUOTE] the new start menu is fine on the server, but don't get me started on the fucking charms bar on server 2012.
since I never actually posted my server yet... [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/PDc2e7P.png[/IMG] not much but good enough to run the very little I do.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/rRxtnF1.png[/img] I'm getting a better one soon.
everything here outperforms my windows 2000 based pentinum ii server with 256mb of ram
[QUOTE=cueballv2themax;40182734]everything here outperforms my windows 2000 based pentinum ii server with 256mb of ram[/QUOTE] My raspberry pi media server doesn't oh wait...
I have this old laptop that has a broken GPU as a server but I don't have anything to use it for since it can't be accessed from WAN. [img]http://i.imgur.com/VpX1SD5.png[/img]
[QUOTE=Amiga OS;40183151]Can't you port forward it? Or is your ISP complete ass and has you behind a NAT?[/QUOTE] Not exactly sure, but forwarding ports through all the networking equipment I have doesn't make it accessible from outside. I don't know if I'd feel safe exposing a machine from my home network to internet either.
are you trying to access them or are you using canyouseeme.org or having someone else check for you?
[QUOTE=FrankPetrov;40183941]are you trying to access them or are you using canyouseeme.org or having someone else check for you?[/QUOTE] The last time I tried canyouseeme.org nor someone else could access. I haven't researched the issue because I don't have much of use for it anyways.
Any suggestions for accessing two separate iLO clients on a home network? I can only forward port 443 to a single IP :/
[QUOTE=MTMod;40232828]Any suggestions for accessing two separate iLO clients on a home network? I can only forward port 443 to a single IP :/[/QUOTE] You can access the configuration for it via web browser correct? If so, go into the web config page-> administration-> settings-> access then you should be able to change the port there.
Can you forward port 443 internally to a different port externally? So to connect to the first one you would go to EXTERNALIP:443 and the second one EXTERNALIP:444? If not you could set up a VPN or a reverse proxy using Apache or IIS to get to them that way.
Don't forward your iLO ports to the web? also [img]http://gyazo.com/5bac9b0b234dbd404faab137e04f7c82.png?1365659321[/img] obviously not mine with that many users, but it's a nice system
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.