Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Multiple IP's or Router?

Last response: in Networking
Share
September 26, 2010 7:07:17 PM

The way I will explain it is kinda all over the place. The way the pc's are setup, I have all 5 pc's connecting to a gigabit switch (D-Link DGS-2208), then to the modem.

I have a small home network of 5 pc's all of which so far connect to the internet through their own IP addresses (comcast offered this, but no longer). Lately I've been having random packet loss. When the tech came out he couldn't find the problem. So he attempted to replace the modem to see if that was the issue, but the new modems they have don't allow for multiple IP's. So for now I still have the old one. And still have the random packet loss issue.


So far I've replaced all the cables. Next step is to replace the switch. But if they have to replace the modem. I could go business class and get multiple that way..

Or, should I not bother and just get a router?

Will I lose speed using 1-ip + router over multiple ip's?



More about : multiple router

September 26, 2010 11:12:24 PM

As far as having one public IP vs. multiple public IPs, confining yourself to a single public IP doesn't necessarily mean you'll lose bandwidth. In my experience, the multiple IPs still share a single physical connection to the ISP (via the modem). And it’s that connection that determines your throughput (e.g., 10mbps). All the additional public IPs do is allow you to have several devices addressable within the public IP space. You would probably have to use multiple modems (or perhaps a special business class modem) in order to increase your throughput.

Having multiple public IPs can be useful in certain circumstances. For example, if you have only a single public IP and use a NAT router to share it, that creates a local IP space (e.g., 192.168.1.x) behind the public IP. Now let’s say you want to have two (2) XBOX systems connected to the Internet. That’s a problem since the router can only port forward to a single local IP address for a given set of ports. But if you have multiple public IPs and no router (or a router w/ NAT disabled), port forwarding isn’t even necessary. OTOH, having a single public IP assigned to the router and all your devices behind it using a local IP space, and protected by a common firewall, has its advantages as well.

Fact is, most home users don’t really need multiple public IPs. As I described above, you can always make a case here and there. But that’s clearly the exception. Unless you can make the case for why any given device needs to be in the public IP space, I would advise against it. IOW, assume the local IP space will suffice by default, and move to the public IP space only when necessary.

As far as random packet loss, that’s obviously unrelated to the number of public IPs (at least it’s not obvious how it would be related). That sounds like a problem w/ the modem, or else something upstream at the ISP (esp. if you’re not using a router, which the ISP will be quick to blame). What wasn’t clear was whether it was ever determined if replacing the modem would have cleaned up your packet loss problem. I realize you’re concerned about the loss of those additional public IPs, but didn’t they at least replace the modem, if only temporarily, to see if it corrected the problem?

September 27, 2010 12:15:55 AM

They offered to replace the modem, but since I pay for the additional IP's, I would not be able use them with the new modem (new modem only allows for one IP).
September 29, 2010 2:17:07 AM

Hellbound said:
They offered to replace the modem, but since I pay for the additional IP's, I would not be able use them with the new modem (new modem only allows for one IP).


I agree with eibgrad, if you aren't severing anything out to the internet (Web, FTP, email ect) then multiple ips are worthless and it just 4 times more likely to be hacked :) . better to save money to go with 1ip
!