OK so its not a grand as the subject makes out.
However i am looking to put a NAS drive at the end of the garden in a
very small nas sized building, so i can do off site backups. The
electric and networking is not an issue.

I am wondering how to cope with heat,cold and physical security

The reason i am not using cloud is
1. i want to be sure where my data is
2. Uploading 4TB of data to the cloud will take forever
3. This should be considerably cheaper.

Any one ever tried this

Chris.

On Apr 1, 8:42*am, Chris Crinkle wrote:
OK so its not a grand as the subject makes out.
However i am looking to put a NAS drive at the end of the garden in a
very small nas sized building, so i can do off site backups. The
electric and networking is not an issue.

I am wondering how to cope with heat,cold and physical security


There is no such thing as total security.
You can put bars on the window or have no window.
You can have it brick built and insulated during construction.
You can have a secure door.
Don't forget to make the roof secure (often overlooked)
You can have cctv.
But you are only buying time.
Such a secure structure attracts attention as holding something
valuable.

For heating/cooling I would have a small fan heater and extract fan.

On 01/04/2013 09:15, harry wrote:
On Apr 1, 8:42 am, Chris Crinkle wrote:
OK so its not a grand as the subject makes out.
However i am looking to put a NAS drive at the end of the garden in a
very small nas sized building, so i can do off site backups. The
electric and networking is not an issue.

I am wondering how to cope with heat,cold and physical security


There is no such thing as total security.
You can put bars on the window or have no window.
You can have it brick built and insulated during construction.
You can have a secure door.
Don't forget to make the roof secure (often overlooked)
You can have cctv.
But you are only buying time.
Such a secure structure attracts attention as holding something
valuable.

For heating/cooling I would have a small fan heater and extract fan.


Thanks Harry, but i was thinking NAS sized, and hidden behind a bush.
I could just use bricks with a secure roof (or lid/door), but i'm
worried about heat and cold, so i was looking for passive options, i.e
not heating or AC. Insulation should deal with host of the cold issues,
but what about heat in the summer , will air vents be sufficient

Chris Crinkle wrote:
OK so its not a grand as the subject makes out.
However i am looking to put a NAS drive at the end of the garden in a
very small nas sized building, so i can do off site backups. The electric
and networking is not an issue.

I am wondering how to cope with heat,cold and physical security

The reason i am not using cloud is
1. i want to be sure where my data is
2. Uploading 4TB of data to the cloud will take forever
3. This should be considerably cheaper.

Any one ever tried this


Err yes, but the NAS isn't at the bottom of the Garden. It's an 8TB device,
four drives, and it's the size of a toaster and silent so it sits in a
spare bedroom and doesn't disturb guests.

A "nas sized building" would be smaller than a dog kennel. The NAS is 135W
so heat isn't exactly a problem either.

--
€¢DarWin|
_/ _/

On 01/04/2013 09:15, harry wrote:
On Apr 1, 8:42 am, Chris Crinkle wrote:
OK so its not a grand as the subject makes out.
However i am looking to put a NAS drive at the end of the garden in a
very small nas sized building, so i can do off site backups. The
electric and networking is not an issue.

I am wondering how to cope with heat,cold and physical security


There is no such thing as total security.
You can put bars on the window or have no window.
You can have it brick built and insulated during construction.
You can have a secure door.
Don't forget to make the roof secure (often overlooked)
You can have cctv.
But you are only buying time.
Such a secure structure attracts attention as holding something
valuable.

For heating/cooling I would have a small fan heater and extract fan.


The OP did write "very small nas sized building".

Given one randomly select small 4TB NAS runs out at 20.4 x 8.6 x 12.7
cm, I get the impression your suggestions are a little OTT.

I see the most difficult issues as being cooling and humidity.

--
Rod

On 01/04/2013 09:30, Steve Firth wrote:
Chris Crinkle wrote:
OK so its not a grand as the subject makes out.
However i am looking to put a NAS drive at the end of the garden in a
very small nas sized building, so i can do off site backups. The electric
and networking is not an issue.

I am wondering how to cope with heat,cold and physical security

The reason i am not using cloud is
1. i want to be sure where my data is
2. Uploading 4TB of data to the cloud will take forever
3. This should be considerably cheaper.

Any one ever tried this


Err yes, but the NAS isn't at the bottom of the Garden. It's an 8TB device,
four drives, and it's the size of a toaster and silent so it sits in a
spare bedroom and doesn't disturb guests.

A "nas sized building" would be smaller than a dog kennel. The NAS is 135W
so heat isn't exactly a problem either.

Steve,
Its the heat build up from the disk (single) that i'm most concerned about

On Monday 01 April 2013 09:25 Chris Crinkle wrote in uk.d-i-y:

On 01/04/2013 09:15, harry wrote:
On Apr 1, 8:42 am, Chris Crinkle wrote:
OK so its not a grand as the subject makes out.
However i am looking to put a NAS drive at the end of the garden in a
very small nas sized building, so i can do off site backups. The
electric and networking is not an issue.

I am wondering how to cope with heat,cold and physical security


There is no such thing as total security.
You can put bars on the window or have no window.
You can have it brick built and insulated during construction.
You can have a secure door.
Don't forget to make the roof secure (often overlooked)
You can have cctv.
But you are only buying time.
Such a secure structure attracts attention as holding something
valuable.

For heating/cooling I would have a small fan heater and extract fan.


Thanks Harry, but i was thinking NAS sized, and hidden behind a bush.
I could just use bricks with a secure roof (or lid/door), but i'm
worried about heat and cold, so i was looking for passive options, i.e
not heating or AC. Insulation should deal with host of the cold issues,
but what about heat in the summer , will air vents be sufficient

Couple of options: small brick enclosure , say 2 ft cube with a slab on top.
Biggest problem will be protecting from ingress of hose spray. Grow some
plants over it and it will look like some cover over a drain or valve or
something.

Or, more railway-esq - a metal or plastic water resistant enclosure - say a
meter box, on a pole or a wall. Again, wall mounted it might be mistaken for
am actual meter box or a box that contains some garden electrics.

Cold is not a problem and neither is damp - the NAS will have enough
internal heat to say dry.

Hot is, in summer, so if it can go somewhere shaded, it will probably be OK
without box ventilation (lose heat through the walls).

--
Tim Watts Personal Blog: http://squiddy.blog.dionic.net/

http://www.sensorly.com/ Crowd mapping of 2G/3G/4G mobile signal coverage

Reading this on the web? See:
http://wiki.diyfaq.org.uk/index.php?title=Usenet

On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 08:30:59 +0000, Steve Firth wrote:

Err yes, but the NAS isn't at the bottom of the Garden.
... it sits in a spare bedroom

Not much of an offsite backup, then. The great thing about DR planning is
that you can quite legitimately be a real doom'n'gloom monger... Fire,
pestilence, plague.

Mind you, I can think of a stack of physical circumstances where having
it at the end of the garden wouldn't be much of an offsite, either.
Flooding, for a start.

Yes, seeding to the cloud takes a hell of a long while. BUT - once it's
there, it's there. After that, it's just deltas that go up.

The real pikey offsite backup solution is just to have a pair of
identical USB drives, NASs, whatever - and swap 'em over every once in a
while, leaving the "offsite" one round at a mate's house.

Chris Crinkle :
OK so its not a grand as the subject makes out.
However i am looking to put a NAS drive at the end of the garden in a
very small nas sized building, so i can do off site backups. The
electric and networking is not an issue.

I am wondering how to cope with heat,cold and physical security

I've used a garden NAS for backup for many years. It's been, at various
times, in the garage, in the stable, and in the greenhouse.

I didn't take any great notice of environmental matters when choosing
the NAS, and selected a Buffalo LinkStation. I did have one that failed
on me. The replacement was better than the original because it had a
physical on/off switch and didn't need individual attention every time
the power was interrupted (which was quite often, for irrelevant
reasons).

The NAS and its Homeplug connector live inside an old cardboard box
right next to the power point, making them inconspicuous to visitors.

I haven't bothered at all about physical security, which was already
taken care of for the garage anyway. If the drive were to be stolen, I'd
find out immediately (backup failure), and I'd simply replace it, no big
deal. *But* the documents on the drive are contained in TrueCrypt
volume, so there would be no data security implications. By far the
majority of the data on the drive is media files, which are not
sensitive and therefore unencrypted.

HTH

--
Mike Barnes

On Mon, 1 Apr 2013 09:07:24 +0000 (UTC), Adrian
wrote:



Yes, seeding to the cloud takes a hell of a long while. BUT - once it's
there, it's there. After that, it's just deltas that go up.


I have three main concerns about cloud storage: it not being there
anymore; it being under a competitor's control; it being under the
whim of whichever government controls the hosting site.

Google, without the brackets, (site:theregister.co.uk "goes titsup")
and surprise yourself how many of these business failures were cloud
hosts that gave their clients no warning of impending disaster. Google
itself has a track record of dropping services when it feels like it
because it has become bored. And it may be within the margins of
statistical probability but there are a steady trickle of new,
innovative companies who use $bigonlinecompany as a cloud host who
have complained that their new, innovative product/service was stifled
at birth because $bigonlinecompany brought out the same new,
innovative thing a week before their launch date.

Nick

On 01/04/2013 09:30, Steve Firth wrote:
Chris Crinkle wrote:
OK so its not a grand as the subject makes out.
However i am looking to put a NAS drive at the end of the garden in a
very small nas sized building, so i can do off site backups. The electric
and networking is not an issue.

I am wondering how to cope with heat,cold and physical security

The reason i am not using cloud is
1. i want to be sure where my data is
2. Uploading 4TB of data to the cloud will take forever
3. This should be considerably cheaper.

Any one ever tried this


Err yes, but the NAS isn't at the bottom of the Garden. It's an 8TB device,
four drives, and it's the size of a toaster and silent so it sits in a
spare bedroom and doesn't disturb guests.

A "nas sized building" would be smaller than a dog kennel. The NAS is 135W
so heat isn't exactly a problem either.


Talk about OTT.
My two 2T NAS drives are just bigger than a 3.5" drive and take about 6W
each.
The gigabit switch is nearly as big and probably uses as much power.

You could fit them in those plastic boxes they sell to put 4 way
extensions in but mine live in the shed.

They aren't expensive but you may want to encrypt the disks to protect
the data if one is stolen.

BTW how does yours count as off site, is it in a different building?

Adrian :
The real pikey offsite backup solution is just to have a pair of
identical USB drives, NASs, whatever - and swap 'em over every once in a
while, leaving the "offsite" one round at a mate's house.

That's not far off what I do. Except that I have three, not two, and the
latest lives in my car, or (when I'm away) in my suitcase.

--
Mike Barnes

On 01/04/13 08:42, Chris Crinkle wrote:
OK so its not a grand as the subject makes out.
However i am looking to put a NAS drive at the end of the garden in a
very small nas sized building, so i can do off site backups. The
electric and networking is not an issue.

I am wondering how to cope with heat,cold and physical security

The reason i am not using cloud is
1. i want to be sure where my data is
2. Uploading 4TB of data to the cloud will take forever
3. This should be considerably cheaper.

Any one ever tried this

Chris.


yes, in that I have a local 'cloud server' I built myself
No, in that its not down the garden.

Heat? no worries. use a low powered machine - mines based on an atom -
more than fast enough and able to cope with up to 30C ambient.

Cold. It will keep itself warm enough - just keep the rain off and
ventilation good.

Physical security? put it somewhere no one thinks of looking and screw
it down. Spray it lurid colors and stencil your name and postcode on it.
Not worth nicking then. The tea leafs who do garden sheds want easily
saleable **** that is anonymous.

It wont be worth a lot anyway.


--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

On 01/04/13 09:36, Chris Crinkle wrote:
On 01/04/2013 09:30, Steve Firth wrote:
Chris Crinkle wrote:
OK so its not a grand as the subject makes out.
However i am looking to put a NAS drive at the end of the garden in a
very small nas sized building, so i can do off site backups. The
electric
and networking is not an issue.

I am wondering how to cope with heat,cold and physical security

The reason i am not using cloud is
1. i want to be sure where my data is
2. Uploading 4TB of data to the cloud will take forever
3. This should be considerably cheaper.

Any one ever tried this


Err yes, but the NAS isn't at the bottom of the Garden. It's an 8TB
device,
four drives, and it's the size of a toaster and silent so it sits in a
spare bedroom and doesn't disturb guests.

A "nas sized building" would be smaller than a dog kennel. The NAS is
135W
so heat isn't exactly a problem either.

Steve,
Its the heat build up from the disk (single) that i'm most concerned about

well don't. They wont run hardly at all. Unless they need to. My twin
500GB system runs at about 5-10W. Eniugh to stay warm, but it never gets
hot.



--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

Chris Crinkle wrote:
I am wondering how to cope with heat,cold and physical security

The reason i am not using cloud is
1. i want to be sure where my data is
2. Uploading 4TB of data to the cloud will take forever
3. This should be considerably cheaper.

You could take the RAID approach. Don't spend lots on a fancy enclosure,
have two enclosures (passive-cooled system, seal up so it's watertight,
expose a surface to air or water). Put them in different places. If one
goes down, the other is still there.

Biggest risk is correlation: you get a flood and both are washed away,
heatwave, electric spike, something like that. If you can manage it,
diversity is your friend here.

Theo

Mike Barnes wrote:

I haven't bothered at all about physical security, which was already taken
care of for the garage anyway. If the drive were to be stolen, I'd find
out immediately (backup failure)

Seems to me that if your drive were stolen you'd no longer need a garage!

--
Jeremy C B Nicoll - my opinions are my own.

Email sent to my from-address will be deleted. Instead, please reply
to replacing "aaa" by "284".

Jeremy Nicoll - news posts :
Mike Barnes wrote:

I haven't bothered at all about physical security, which was already taken
care of for the garage anyway. If the drive were to be stolen, I'd find
out immediately (backup failure)

Seems to me that if your drive were stolen you'd no longer need a garage!

:-)

--
Mike Barnes

On 01/04/2013 08:42, Chris Crinkle wrote:
OK so its not a grand as the subject makes out.
However i am looking to put a NAS drive at the end of the garden in a
very small nas sized building, so i can do off site backups. The
electric and networking is not an issue.

I am wondering how to cope with heat,cold and physical security

Heat and cold ought not be a problem if you insulate it a little. They
tend to be fairly power efficient, and so should not get too hot. While
at the same time will provide some heat to keep the thing from getting
too cold.

The reason i am not using cloud is
1. i want to be sure where my data is
2. Uploading 4TB of data to the cloud will take forever
3. This should be considerably cheaper.

Any one ever tried this

On the security front there are a few things to consider... obviously
backups to it can be encrypted. Media and other less sensitive stuff
probably does not matter. However also give some consideration to how
you network it, in as much as exporting a high bandwidth connection to
your lan to somewhere inherently more accessible than your house needs
to be done with some care!



--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On 01/04/2013 09:36, Chris Crinkle wrote:
On 01/04/2013 09:30, Steve Firth wrote:
Chris Crinkle wrote:
OK so its not a grand as the subject makes out.
However i am looking to put a NAS drive at the end of the garden in a
very small nas sized building, so i can do off site backups. The
electric
and networking is not an issue.

I am wondering how to cope with heat,cold and physical security

The reason i am not using cloud is
1. i want to be sure where my data is
2. Uploading 4TB of data to the cloud will take forever
3. This should be considerably cheaper.

Any one ever tried this


Err yes, but the NAS isn't at the bottom of the Garden. It's an 8TB
device,
four drives, and it's the size of a toaster and silent so it sits in a
spare bedroom and doesn't disturb guests.

A "nas sized building" would be smaller than a dog kennel. The NAS is
135W
so heat isn't exactly a problem either.

Steve,
Its the heat build up from the disk (single) that i'm most concerned about

I have a home server sat in a cupboard (multiple disks, triple core
processor, etc.) I fitted vents on the side of the cupboard (top and
bottom) and the top vent has thermostatically controlled fan fitted. I
would have thought that a NAS in a box, raised a few inches, with vents
and a fan on the bottom would work, Fan grille and filter would prevent
rodents and insects from getting in, direction would prevent rain or spray.

I would presume that the NAS is similar to a PC in that if the vent fan
were to fail and the temperature rose too high, it would shut down?

SteveW

On 01/04/2013 10:07, Adrian wrote:
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 08:30:59 +0000, Steve Firth wrote:

Err yes, but the NAS isn't at the bottom of the Garden.
... it sits in a spare bedroom

Not much of an offsite backup, then. The great thing about DR planning is
that you can quite legitimately be a real doom'n'gloom monger... Fire,
pestilence, plague.

Mind you, I can think of a stack of physical circumstances where having
it at the end of the garden wouldn't be much of an offsite, either.
Flooding, for a start.

Plant a telgraph pole; attach your NAS enclosure loosely with a pair of
rings; fit floats and long cables - you'd need a hell of a flood before
it reached the top of the pole!

Yes, seeding to the cloud takes a hell of a long while. BUT - once it's
there, it's there. After that, it's just deltas that go up.

The real pikey offsite backup solution is just to have a pair of
identical USB drives, NASs, whatever - and swap 'em over every once in a
while, leaving the "offsite" one round at a mate's house.

On 01/04/2013 08:42, Chris Crinkle wrote:
OK so its not a grand as the subject makes out.
However i am looking to put a NAS drive at the end of the garden in a
very small nas sized building, so i can do off site backups. The
electric and networking is not an issue.

I am wondering how to cope with heat,cold and physical security

The reason i am not using cloud is
1. i want to be sure where my data is
2. Uploading 4TB of data to the cloud will take forever
3. This should be considerably cheaper.

Any one ever tried this

Chris.

I have a NAS drive ( 2 x 1TB) and it is surprisingly very slow ....
takes Hrs to put a backup file on it.
Even though connected only a metre from Router.

Mine is a D-Link DNS 323 ..... and best it ever does is 10MB/s

On 01/04/13 23:44, Rick Hughes wrote:

I have a NAS drive ( 2 x 1TB) and it is surprisingly very slow ....
takes Hrs to put a backup file on it.
Even though connected only a metre from Router.

Mine is a D-Link DNS 323 ..... and best it ever does is 10MB/s

buy a 100mbps switch then

--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

Rick Hughes wrote:
On 01/04/2013 08:42, Chris Crinkle wrote:
OK so its not a grand as the subject makes out.
However i am looking to put a NAS drive at the end of the garden in a
very small nas sized building, so i can do off site backups. The
electric and networking is not an issue.

I am wondering how to cope with heat,cold and physical security

The reason i am not using cloud is
1. i want to be sure where my data is
2. Uploading 4TB of data to the cloud will take forever
3. This should be considerably cheaper.

Any one ever tried this

Chris.

I have a NAS drive ( 2 x 1TB) and it is surprisingly very slow .... takes
Hrs to put a backup file on it.
Even though connected only a metre from Router.

Mine is a D-Link DNS 323 ..... and best it ever does is 10MB/s

That's what you get for buying a D-Link unit. I have two NASs. One I built
myself using a Turion chip micro-ATX board, old PC case and some drives
lying around. The other is a QNAP. Homebrew is 80-100 MB/s the QNAP 100-150
MB/s. a no-name shonky NAS with a 2TB drive is as bad as your D-Link, only
gets used because it is also a freeview recorder.

--
€¢DarWin|
_/ _/

On 2013-04-01, SteveW wrote:

On 01/04/2013 10:07, Adrian wrote:
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 08:30:59 +0000, Steve Firth wrote:

Err yes, but the NAS isn't at the bottom of the Garden.
... it sits in a spare bedroom

Not much of an offsite backup, then. The great thing about DR planning is
that you can quite legitimately be a real doom'n'gloom monger... Fire,
pestilence, plague.

Mind you, I can think of a stack of physical circumstances where having
it at the end of the garden wouldn't be much of an offsite, either.
Flooding, for a start.

Plant a telgraph pole; attach your NAS enclosure loosely with a pair of
rings; fit floats and long cables - you'd need a hell of a flood before
it reached the top of the pole!

Lightning!
:-)

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 01/04/13 23:44, Rick Hughes wrote:

I have a NAS drive ( 2 x 1TB) and it is surprisingly very slow ....
takes Hrs to put a backup file on it.
Even though connected only a metre from Router.

Mine is a D-Link DNS 323 ..... and best it ever does is 10MB/s

buy a 100mbps switch then

You mean a gigabit switch? 100mbs is surely what he already has.

--
Jeremy C B Nicoll - my opinions are my own.

Email sent to my from-address will be deleted. Instead, please reply
to replacing "aaa" by "284".

On 03/04/13 18:18, Jeremy Nicoll - news posts wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 01/04/13 23:44, Rick Hughes wrote:

I have a NAS drive ( 2 x 1TB) and it is surprisingly very slow ....
takes Hrs to put a backup file on it.
Even though connected only a metre from Router.

Mine is a D-Link DNS 323 ..... and best it ever does is 10MB/s

buy a 100mbps switch then

You mean a gigabit switch? 100mbs is surely what he already has.

I don't see how you can say that. That Dlink has a gigabit port so its
obviously not connnected by a fast switch. Probably it in his router
which probably only has a 10Mbps switch in it

I get pretty much 100Mbps between my desktop and server - because I
have a massive 100MPS switch in between.

Its true that my latest router also does 100MPbs..allegedly, but the old
one didn't.


--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

On 03/04/2013 18:54, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 03/04/13 18:18, Jeremy Nicoll - news posts wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 01/04/13 23:44, Rick Hughes wrote:

I have a NAS drive ( 2 x 1TB) and it is surprisingly very slow ....
takes Hrs to put a backup file on it.
Even though connected only a metre from Router.

Mine is a D-Link DNS 323 ..... and best it ever does is 10MB/s

buy a 100mbps switch then

You mean a gigabit switch? 100mbs is surely what he already has.

I don't see how you can say that. That Dlink has a gigabit port so its
obviously not connnected by a fast switch. Probably it in his router
which probably only has a 10Mbps switch in it

I get pretty much 100Mbps between my desktop and server - because I
have a massive 100MPS switch in between.

Its true that my latest router also does 100MPbs..allegedly, but the old
one didn't.


If he's getting 10 mega BYTES it must be on a 100 mega BITS or better port.

Andy

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 03/04/13 18:18, Jeremy Nicoll - news posts wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 01/04/13 23:44, Rick Hughes wrote:

Mine is a D-Link DNS 323 ..... and best it ever does is 10MB/s

buy a 100mbps switch then

You mean a gigabit switch? 100mbs is surely what he already has.

I don't see how you can say that. That Dlink has a gigabit port so its
obviously not connnected by a fast switch. Probably it in his router
which probably only has a 10Mbps switch in it

But he said the best it ever did was 10 MB/s, which means 80 Mbps of data is
already getting processed, plus whatever protocol info gets pushed around. I
think that probably means a 100Mbps connection running flat out.

Or have I misunderstood?

--
Jeremy C B Nicoll - my opinions are my own.

Email sent to my from-address will be deleted. Instead, please reply
to replacing "aaa" by "284".

On 03/04/13 19:57, Andy Champ wrote:
On 03/04/2013 18:54, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 03/04/13 18:18, Jeremy Nicoll - news posts wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 01/04/13 23:44, Rick Hughes wrote:

I have a NAS drive ( 2 x 1TB) and it is surprisingly very slow ....
takes Hrs to put a backup file on it.
Even though connected only a metre from Router.

Mine is a D-Link DNS 323 ..... and best it ever does is 10MB/s

buy a 100mbps switch then

You mean a gigabit switch? 100mbs is surely what he already has.

I don't see how you can say that. That Dlink has a gigabit port so its
obviously not connnected by a fast switch. Probably it in his router
which probably only has a 10Mbps switch in it

I get pretty much 100Mbps between my desktop and server - because I
have a massive 100MPS switch in between.

Its true that my latest router also does 100MPbs..allegedly, but the old
one didn't.


If he's getting 10 mega BYTES it must be on a 100 mega BITS or better port.

Andy
ah..missed that..

--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

On 03/04/2013 20:01, Jeremy Nicoll - news posts wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 03/04/13 18:18, Jeremy Nicoll - news posts wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 01/04/13 23:44, Rick Hughes wrote:

Mine is a D-Link DNS 323 ..... and best it ever does is 10MB/s

buy a 100mbps switch then

You mean a gigabit switch? 100mbs is surely what he already has.

I don't see how you can say that. That Dlink has a gigabit port so its
obviously not connnected by a fast switch. Probably it in his router
which probably only has a 10Mbps switch in it

But he said the best it ever did was 10 MB/s, which means 80 Mbps of data is
already getting processed, plus whatever protocol info gets pushed around. I
think that probably means a 100Mbps connection running flat out.

Or have I misunderstood?


Probably.
In professional circles serial links are always measured in bits per
second. Mb/s and MB/s are the same.
There are people that try to insist that Mb/s and MB/s are different.
In reality professionals now write bits/s or bytes/s so there is no
misunderstanding.

On 05/04/2013 19:35, dennis@home wrote:
On 03/04/2013 20:01, Jeremy Nicoll - news posts wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 03/04/13 18:18, Jeremy Nicoll - news posts wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 01/04/13 23:44, Rick Hughes wrote:

Mine is a D-Link DNS 323 ..... and best it ever does is 10MB/s

buy a 100mbps switch then

You mean a gigabit switch? 100mbs is surely what he already has.

I don't see how you can say that. That Dlink has a gigabit port so its
obviously not connnected by a fast switch. Probably it in his router
which probably only has a 10Mbps switch in it

But he said the best it ever did was 10 MB/s, which means 80 Mbps of
data is
already getting processed, plus whatever protocol info gets pushed
around. I
think that probably means a 100Mbps connection running flat out.

Or have I misunderstood?


Probably.
In professional circles serial links are always measured in bits per
second. Mb/s and MB/s are the same.
There are people that try to insist that Mb/s and MB/s are different.
In reality professionals now write bits/s or bytes/s so there is no
misunderstanding.

I had this bizarre idea that professionals would use scientific notation
- that is, s�»Â¹ rather than /s.

(That will probably screw-up right royally - it is lower-case 's',
superscript minus one.)

--
Rod

On 05/04/2013 19:43, polygonum wrote:
I had this bizarre idea that professionals would use scientific notation
- that is, s�»Â¹ rather than /s.

(That will probably screw-up right royally - it is lower-case 's',
superscript minus one.)

We just write "the lan". We all know its gig ethernet

"10 meg" "100 meg" or "gig" are the names I recall flying about. Or
going back further, thick string, thin string and TP.

Andy

On Fri, 05 Apr 2013 20:59:56 +0100, Andy Champ wrote:

On 05/04/2013 19:43, polygonum wrote:
I had this bizarre idea that professionals would use scientific
notation - that is, s�»Â¹ rather than /s.

(That will probably screw-up right royally - it is lower-case 's',
superscript minus one.)

We just write "the lan". We all know its gig ethernet

"10 meg" "100 meg" or "gig" are the names I recall flying about. Or
going back further, thick string, thin string and TP.

And pigeons.


--
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
My posts (including this one) are my copyright and if @diy_forums on
Twitter wish to tweet them they can pay me £30 a post
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

On 05/04/2013 20:59, Andy Champ wrote:
On 05/04/2013 19:43, polygonum wrote:
I had this bizarre idea that professionals would use scientific notation
- that is, s�»Â¹ rather than /s.

(That will probably screw-up right royally - it is lower-case 's',
superscript minus one.)

We just write "the lan". We all know its gig ethernet

"10 meg" "100 meg" or "gig" are the names I recall flying about. Or
going back further, thick string, thin string and TP.

Liquorice, string amd "Bloody 'ell, that's fast"


--
Tciao for Now!

John.

"dennis@home" wrote:
[snip]

In professional circles serial links are always measured in bits per
second. Mb/s and MB/s are the same.

Horse****.

There are people that try to insist that Mb/s and MB/s are different.

Yes, people who know what they are talking about. Clearly this group
excludes you.

In reality professionals now write bits/s or bytes/s so there is no misunderstanding.

How would you know what professionals do Pennis?

--
€¢DarWin|
_/ _/

"Steve Firth" wrote in message
...

"dennis@home" wrote:
[snip]

In professional circles serial links are always measured in bits per
second. Mb/s and MB/s are the same.

Horse****.

For a 1000lb horse; 50 to 60 lbs/day apparently.

On 06/04/2013 13:16, Richard wrote:
"Steve Firth" wrote in message
...


"dennis@home" wrote:
[snip]

In professional circles serial links are always measured in bits per
second. Mb/s and MB/s are the same.

Horse****.

For a 1000lb horse; 50 to 60 lbs/day apparently.

And there was I thinking that professional circles would be serially
linked by chains. Or is that _into_ chains? But a chain is 66 feet not
50 to 60 pounds...

--
Rod

On 06/04/2013 13:05, Steve Firth wrote:
"dennis@home" wrote:
[snip]

In professional circles serial links are always measured in bits per
second. Mb/s and MB/s are the same.

Horse****.

There are people that try to insist that Mb/s and MB/s are different.

Yes, people who know what they are talking about. Clearly this group
excludes you.

In reality professionals now write bits/s or bytes/s so there is no misunderstanding.

How would you know what professionals do Pennis?



Well its easy enough to prove you talk cr@p.

For instance Cisco use 100MB when they refer to 100 Megabit switches,
which just shows that MB is meaningless.

Of course the engineers that produce the technical documents spell it
out as megabits.

Shouldn't you be out pressing some olives to make cheap oil or are
buying it from lidl and reselling it?

Huge wrote:
On 05/04/2013 19:35, dennis@home wrote:

Mb/s and MB/s are the same.

Oh, dennis, you still make me smile after all this time.

Pennis is quite amusingly stupid. But he typifies BT. ****ing useless bunch
of morons who should be first up against the wall (etc).

--
€¢DarWin|
_/ _/

"dennis@home" wrote in message
eb.com...
On 06/04/2013 13:05, Steve Firth wrote:
"dennis@home" wrote:
[snip]

In professional circles serial links are always measured in bits per
second. Mb/s and MB/s are the same.

Horse****.

There are people that try to insist that Mb/s and MB/s are different.

Yes, people who know what they are talking about. Clearly this group
excludes you.

In reality professionals now write bits/s or bytes/s so there is no
misunderstanding.

How would you know what professionals do Pennis?



Well its easy enough to prove you talk cr@p.

For instance Cisco use 100MB when they refer to 100 Megabit switches,

Where did you see that Dennis?

snip