RJ45 Dual Ethernet Adapter.... can I get one that works with 1 connection??

I have a simple RJ45 Ethernet adapter(splitter), with 2 ports. If I plug in 2 or even 1 active Ethernet connections into the splitter, then I can make a successful internet connection with my computer. But if 1 of those connections is inactive (and the other one is active), then BOTH connections do not work through this adapter, and my computer will read "cable unplugged" (Mac or PC, same problem). Also, whether I connect the adapter to the router or to the computer, same problem.

So basically, I am looking for a similar dirt cheap adapter, that will ignore the fact that one Ethernet cable is not passing a signal, and allow the active one through. (I know I can do what I am seeking with an old router, but I want a cheap splitter/adapter only). Is this doable?

p.s. If it helps,  a sticker on the adapter says "100Base-T" with numbers "1-8" listed twice (once with a rectangle around the numbers). 

are you talking about a switch or a hub your plugging them into?

give the make and model number, or take some pictures

Generally described as a "splitter", I believe its more of a hub than a switch. Please see photo, this is exactly what it looks like: https://ibb.co/F5Sk0RQ

It is a simple splitter not a hub or switch.

Generally described as a "splitter", I believe its more of a hub than a switch. Please see photo, this is exactly what it looks like: https://ibb.co/F5Sk0RQ

buy yourself a small 4 port switch.....

random example.....

https://www.amazon.ca/NETGEAR-5-Port-Gigabit-Ethernet-Unmanaged/dp/B07S98YLHM/ref=sr_1_4?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIgbHvztrp5QIVFqSzCh2pdwT4EAAYAiAAEgJ_ZPD_BwE&hvadid=208319112471&hvdev=c&hvlocphy=1002175&hvnetw=g&hvpos=1t2&hvqmt=e&hvrand=18079452006258087566&hvtargid=kwd-300786021744&hydadcr=1530_9454494&keywords=4+port+ethernet+switch&qid=1573734708&sr=8-4

Great, so

a) is it confirmed that a switch type networking device, is the one that will allow me to connect a "dead" (inactive) Ethernet cable to one port, while still allowing a network connection to pass through a cable connected to another port on the device? (Not sure why the splitter I have won't already do that).

b ) Is there any simpler solution, that resembles the splitter I described? ie. I don't need a box with 4 ports, just 2. Thanks!

 

Generally described as a "splitter", I believe its more of a hub than a switch. Please see photo, this is exactly what it looks like: https://ibb.co/F5Sk0RQ

 

buy yourself a small 4 port switch.....

 

random example.....

 

https://www.amazon.ca/NETGEAR-5-Port-Gigabit-Ethernet-Unmanaged/dp/B07S98YLHM/ref=sr_1_4?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIgbHvztrp5QIVFqSzCh2pdwT4EAAYAiAAEgJ_ZPD_BwE&hvadid=208319112471&hvdev=c&hvlocphy=1002175&hvnetw=g&hvpos=1t2&hvqmt=e&hvrand=18079452006258087566&hvtargid=kwd-300786021744&hydadcr=1530_9454494&keywords=4+port+ethernet+switch&qid=1573734708&sr=8-4

 

Edited by Guccifer2, 14 November 2019 - 10:11 AM.

I agree with mikey11, save yourself all this hassle and just get a good 4-port switch. Something like that Netgear GS-305 is a well-established, solid performer.

It's not a question of just buying one, and getting it over with. I need to understand a) why the splitter I have does not pass a networking signal when only one side is connected (whether this is normal for this type of device or not)

and b ) what type of networking device (hub and/or switch?) will guarantee that I can connect an inactive cable to the device, while still allowing an internet connection to pass through the active cable.

From there, I can proceed myself to research exactly what product suits my needs.

If anyone can shed some light on that, thanks.

Edited by Guccifer2, 14 November 2019 - 10:10 PM.

Most of the "splitters" I've seen used, and it's been a long time since I've seen one in use, require one at each end of the cable.

Ethernet cable consists of 4 twisted pairs, only 2 twisted pairs are required are required for a connection. The splitters I've seen use 2 pairs on each port, but the image you shared doesn't look like this, so one at each end is required to make it work. It should be buzzed out with a DVM to verify the wiring is as the image shows.

Either way, a simple, cheap switch would be the better solution, no worries about a dead port.

READING MATERIAL

you are not supposed to use BOTH connections on that splitter at the same time,

thats not what its intended for, you only use one side or the other,

its so you can route one cable into two seperate locations, but only use one at a time, if you want to move your computer around,

https://www.wish.com/product/58c2ce82739cb9532fe09fb4?hide_login_modal=true&from_ad=goog_shopping&_display_country_code=CA&_force_currency_code=CAD&pid=googleadwords_int&c=%7BcampaignId%7D&ad_cid=58c2ce82739cb9532fe09fb4&ad_cc=CA&ad_curr=CAD&ad_price=2.00&fallback_cids=5a0420d0976e94737165dc355bbf5ae67a03e616c6d4b0da5bb8791ad9b9f31d1dd1f649&campaign_id=6493229759&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIw43166Ps5QIVAZSzCh3lpQjcEAYYASABEgJzQfD_BwE

note where they say

"Attention: This Ethernet splitter allows two computers to share one Ethernet line, but it doesn't support both computers to connect onto the internet simultaneously."

a switch is entirely different, all ports can be active at the same time.....

the proper item for your situation is a switch, like i already said.....just buy one, its cheap

Edited by mikey11, 15 November 2019 - 08:15 AM.

you are not supposed to use BOTH connections on that splitter at the same time,

 

thats not what its intended for, you only use one side or the other,

 

 

I am not. As I said in my original post, I am only using ONE active connection, and one INACTIVE connection. The problem with the splitter was, plugging an inactive connection (e.g. Ethernet cable not connected to anything), cuts off the active connection. Even though there is no signal on the dead connection, this splitter detects the presence of the pins and/or wires inside the RJ45 jack and cuts both connections if one is inactive. I confirmed this by inserting a truly dead "dummy" RJ45 into one port on the splitter, and it did not cut the active connection from the other port.

So yeah, it looks like this type of splitter will not suit my purpose. Still, I don't want more than 2 ports, and the RJ45 "switches" I've seen are closer to DSL routers, than a simple 2 port device like this splitter. I've got some research to do to see what my options really are, but at least I have a better idea of what I'm dealing with, so thanks.

So you only need one Ethernet port, why have that 'splitter' at all? Just curious but why not just plug your cable directly into the port and toss that thing out? Functionally that adapter isn't what you need anyway if you do want to have more Ethernet ports.

So you only need one Ethernet port, why have that 'splitter' at all? Just curious but why not just plug your cable directly into the port and toss that thing out? Functionally that adapter isn't what you need anyway if you do want to have more Ethernet ports.

Because I need a second port to contain a non-functioning Ethernet cable. Why I need that, I am not at liberty to say. File it under "personal needs". I just came here to try to understand exactly why the splitter I have cut the connection off (ie. whether its faulty or by design), and if there are others of the same type that would not do that, and if not, what type of multi-port device would guarantee that I could do what I needed to do. Unlike what this "Mikey" wishes to believe, I wasn't just looking for recommendations of a particular model, but for information on what works and what doesn't. I have enough now, though.

I have told you what the best solution would be for your needs, time to lock this thread

I already said I didn't need more info, so why don't you mail that remark to yesterday? I don't know why, but you are always and throughout this thread, one step behind everything I say. You don't (and can't) know what the "best solution for my needs" is, so stop being arrogant. And you don't get to decide when an issue is completed or a thread is locked. Actually, I do, because I no longer need the thread. See how that works, Mikey?

I do ... See how that works, Mikey?

No, I do. See how that works, Gucci?