Networks help with making a 3 PC closed network using dsl modem/router over 1/4 mile

hi,
i read the sticky about the difference between a modem and a router,
thanks for having that here.

here's my situation, for work I need to create a network of 3 PC's. All 3 run windows 2000 and have lan ports (two of them are dell workstations).
The catch is two pc's are separated by 100-400 ft and the third is separated by 1/4 mile (1300ft). In A-B-C fashion, it looks like this:
A --> 1/4 mile <-- B --> 400ft <-- C

My plan is to use DSL modems (routers?) and a bulk reel of CAT3 phone line from home depot. I figure this is the cheapest, and easiest, way. Unless someone here knows better.
But my main reason for posting is to ask for a recommendation on an inexpensive dsl modem/router to use for this setup. Really, at points A and C I only need a one port modem, but at point B I would need at least 3 ports? Or a modem with a hub, or router? This is where I'm a little lost on the network technology

thanks

 

for starters cat 3e phone line cable is no good for networking you need cat 5 cable, and also the signal starts to degrade over 100m so as a rule of thumb you should never take a connection over 100m without it passing through something to boost the power of the signal such as a repeater or a switch etc. And as you are on about a connection 1/4 of a mile away your going to need a lot of repeaters 100m apart in very odd places.

your other option is to put broad band connections in at the two locations and then set up a vpn between them i believe you can get routers that will do this for you then you could run a connection between pcs B and C with some cat 5e.

hope this helps

 

right, cat5 cable can't be run over 100m (300ft) length, which was the reason for using cat3 cable, which is standard phone line, AND SDSL modems.
DSL communication is good to 18000 ft, over copper wire pair.
I am looking at a data rate vs wire distance of 26awg and 24awg.
for 26awg, it's 2320 kbps at 9500ft and 144 kbps at 19500 ft.

http://64.33.40.183/dsl_warehouse_pdf/xpeed320.pdf
$120 for the modem, and $150 for the xpeed320r (router).

I just don't know how to configure point B of the network. I think I need a DSL hub, er something.
Maybe 2 dsl routers?, connected across the LAN ports, that'll give me one dsl cat3 line going each way to points A & C.

 

ADSL modems are not the tool to use here - in fact most modems would be. Due to the nature of the way the work very few modems are capable of being connected back to back in the manner you describe and the ones that do are not cheap consumer devices. It's even harder to do this with ADSL devices as they use asymmetric upstream/downstream frequencies so the customer end can be quite cheap but the telco end is expensive. ADC are a company that sell devices capable of this but they weigh in at around $800 each.

A much better solution for you would be to use Multimode Fibre which would give you a distance of around 6500ft to play with. 10M fibre optic transceivers would cost about $120 each, 100M ones would be about $220 each althought you'd have to get someone in to make up and terminate the installed fibre. It also has the advantage of not being susceptible to interference in any way.

The other alternative is to use wireless with directional attenaes if you have/can get line of sight between the positioning which would be the overall cheapest option.

In terms of hardware you'll need at the very least a hub/switch to form the core of the network then you'll need 4 line drivers [regardless of wether you go fibre or xDSL] to make the bridge out to each device. You may, however, just get away with using Cat5e/Cat6 for the device only 400ft away, the quoted limit is about 330ft but you might just be ok. Going wireless would mean a coupla wireless bridges with directional attenae plus a switch.

HTH

J

 

Following up my own post being bad form and all but just looking at the replies since I wrote that and noticed you're talking about using sdsl devices and the ones you have quoted are waaay cheaper than any I have seen elsewhere capable of back to back operation. The line at the end of the PDF is a caveat tho, it says the modems are compatible with DSLAMS from various manufacturers which to me implies that they need to be connected to carrier kit to work and cannot be back to back so before purchasing I would check very carefully that they can be used back to back.

Fibre would still give you massively more bandwidth tho!

J

 

IMHO, Wireless is the easy solution. B gets wired ethernet to an AP, which has a omni antenna. A and C have wireless NICs and directional antennas pointing at the AP. This shouldn't set you back too far, and can be made secure through WPA and VPN.

However, if you need speed and security then it has to be fibre. Unfortunately this is expensive - first you need fibre NICs or "Media converters", then either a fibre switch or yet more media converters, and then the fibre isself. However, once set up it will give you a secure 1000Mbps.

 

If you are lucky and have the money (and I mean ALOT), you could always try out some Fiber networking. Although that stuff is not simple to work with, but it can go on for Kilometers before it needs any sort of boost.

 

thanks for the help,
I should've stated first off, that I cannot use wireless,
and that I also do not need mega bandwidth. As low as
100Kb/s would be acceptable. My biggest constraints are price and
ease of setup, again with wireless not being an option.
I will have to call back one of the tech's and ask specifically about setting up two SDSL's back to back. From the first response, it was recommended going with 2 SDSL modems for a 2 pc network at a 1/4 mile distance, so that leads me to believe they can run back to back. I will have to ask for a 3 point network as well.

 

xDSL is a point to point technology unless you use a DSLAM [which is still technically point to point but then muxes everything together so it looks like point to multipoint] so you'll need 4 if you go down that route to create 2 point to point connections between point a and B and between B and C with a normal ethernet switch at point B to connect them all together.

I'd still be way of the price of the sdsl modems you've been pointed to as they're almost a 5th of the price of similar equipment from anyone else. If you want to look at other xDSL kit that can do the job then try ADC and BlackBox.

If speed really isn't an issue then you could potentially get some very cheap RS232 line drivers and use dialup networking rather than the ethernet port to get 115Kbps between the machines - you wouldn't even need the hubs that way although the machine in the middle would need to be always on.

J

 

as some of the above have mentioned a VPN is the way to go!

alittle dificult to setup but as I have understood it works just as good as a regular network...
Good look with the short projekt

 

Well between the 100foot pc's you should be able to run regular cat5 cable. And over the 1/4mile stretch you can purchase some cheep hub's or switches and run extension power cables along with the network wire to hook up the switches on. Btw 100m should not be something you can count on. Its more like 50-75m depending on the quality of wire or else your network will degrade rather rapidly.

You can always go fiber optic as those things can be run for miles. But fiberptic parts are rather expensive.

Or the third solution is to get a wireless capable router and take off one of the antenas and buy some home made amplifiers and a directional can. Do some google reserch and you will see how to do it. Its not exactly fcc legal but its ok as they wont come knocking on your door about it.

Hope this helps

 

Just extending the Cat5 range using repeaters would not work, as you can only have 4 repeaters in line, so that would leave you with only 400m (1200ft) of Cat5 at the absolute max. In my opinion your best going with a long range wireless network, aslong as you secure it from eves-droppers correctly.

 

Fibre is the only good way to network over that kind of distance.

We use it at work to link the core switches, and the switches from the server housing to other comms rooms containing more switches in different buildings on site.

Fibre is pretty expensive, but not as uber expensive as people think..
Great stuff, suffers absolutely no interference, which is a consideration when running cables out in the open... lightning is a big problem for example.

Really the phone line idea sounds flawed.

 

Why? It's not like it's impossible to secure, and probably the easiest and cheapest solution you're going to find.

 

IIRC RS-232 can easily do 115kbps.
Using cheap phone cable, it is possible to design a HVD interface to allow the line to be very long (+-30v differential and termination at the receiver should go a very long way).