Wireless LAN Design Specialist exam - 950-576 [7:73036]
Took and passed this test today. If you take the recommended classroom training, this is more than adequate preparation. If you don't have the time to take a week off for the classroom training, I recommend using CCO resources plus spending the few dollars for the B*O*S*O*N Wireless SE practice test. The practice tests themselves are probably overkill, at least for the exam I saw. However, Dennis Laganiere did an excellent job not only with the questions, but with explanations and links to web pages both on CCO and elsewhere for background material. It's not that wireless is all that difficult. Like BGP, once you dig into it, things aren't so mysterious. With wireless, the keys appear to be FCC regs, radio RF behaviour, Cisco product line, antennas, wireless vocabulary, and of course, security aspects. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=73036t=73036 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Campus LAN Design w/2600 [7:59850]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Nemeth) wrote: On May 19, 4:50pm, Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote: } } I guess he's just using an IOS image that doesn't support inter-VLAN } routing. Can someone point me to a chart? I don't have a CCO login though. Feature Navigator is always where to find the answer for questions like this; Perhaps I'm just using it incorrectly, but what I don't like about FN is that you plug in your desired features and your platform and it spits out a bunch of very recent IOS images. What if you have an old router with limited memory and thus need older (read: smaller) code? however, you need a CCO login to use it. There was a way that you could sign up for an account as a consultant, but I can't find it at the moment. I think the local Cisco sales team could hook you up. Otherwise, sponsorship through a Cisco partner is a possibility. Anyways, as others have said, he needs a PLUS image. This is the closest one to his current image, that I could find: IP/FW/IDS PLUS IPSEC 56 -- c2600-io3s56i-mz.12.1-5 (40/16) The numbers in parantheses indicate DRAM/Flash requirements. The question now is does he have a SmartNET contract and which feature sets is he licenced to use? If he is going to upgrade, then he should check for applicable security advisories ( http://www.cisco.com/go/psirt/ ) and get an IOS version that has the fixes. }-- End of excerpt from Priscilla Oppenheimer Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=59908t=59850 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Campus LAN Design w/2600 [7:59850]
So, we started to implement the campus LAN design that I mentioned in previous messages, but we can't seem to do VLAN trunking on the darn 2600 router! When we do: int fa0/0 no ip address int fa0/0.1 encapsulation dot1q 100 The router claims that the encapsulation is invalid input. When we tried to do the IP address first, it says: Configuring IP routing on a LAN subinterface is only allowed if that subinterface is already configured as part of an IEEE 802.10, IEEE 802.1Q, or ISL vLAN. (That makes it sound like VLAN trunking is supported!?) IOS version is 12.1(5). He's using the Firewall Feature Set (CBAC stuff) es evidenced by ip inspect commands in his config. Does it not support VLAN trunking?? I've asked him to do show flash and show version so we can get more info. What else should I ask for? THANKS Priscilla Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=59850t=59850 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Campus LAN Design w/2600 [7:59850]
Cil, here is a working config from a 2611 router in my lab. interface Ethernet0/1 no ip address full-duplex ! interface Ethernet0/1.1 encapsulation dot1Q 121 ip address 122.1.1.1 255.255.255.0 ! interface Ethernet0/1.2 encapsulation dot1Q 122 ip address 122.1.2.1 255.255.255.0 ! interface Ethernet0/1.3 encapsulation dot1Q 123 ip address 122.1.3.1 255.255.255.0 ! interface Ethernet0/1.4 encapsulation dot1Q 124 ip address 122.1.4.1 255.255.255.0 ! on the switch side I have the switchport configured as a vlan tunnel, but in your situation I believe you want the switchport configured as a dot1q trunk. the IOS is 12.1.5T10, but yes you do need an image that support dot1q. not al images do. HTH Chuck -- TANSTAAFL there ain't no such thing as a free lunch Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... So, we started to implement the campus LAN design that I mentioned in previous messages, but we can't seem to do VLAN trunking on the darn 2600 router! When we do: int fa0/0 no ip address int fa0/0.1 encapsulation dot1q 100 The router claims that the encapsulation is invalid input. When we tried to do the IP address first, it says: Configuring IP routing on a LAN subinterface is only allowed if that subinterface is already configured as part of an IEEE 802.10, IEEE 802.1Q, or ISL vLAN. (That makes it sound like VLAN trunking is supported!?) IOS version is 12.1(5). He's using the Firewall Feature Set (CBAC stuff) es evidenced by ip inspect commands in his config. Does it not support VLAN trunking?? I've asked him to do show flash and show version so we can get more info. What else should I ask for? THANKS Priscilla Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=59851t=59850 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Campus LAN Design w/2600 [7:59850]
Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote: So, we started to implement the campus LAN design that I mentioned in previous messages, but we can't seem to do VLAN trunking on the darn 2600 router! When we do: int fa0/0 no ip address int fa0/0.1 encapsulation dot1q 100 The router claims that the encapsulation is invalid input. When we tried to do the IP address first, it says: Configuring IP routing on a LAN subinterface is only allowed if that subinterface is already configured as part of an IEEE 802.10, IEEE 802.1Q, or ISL vLAN. (That makes it sound like VLAN trunking is supported!?) IOS version is 12.1(5). He's using the Firewall Feature Set (CBAC stuff) es evidenced by ip inspect commands in his config. Does it not support VLAN trunking?? I've asked him to do show flash and show version so we can get more info. What else should I ask for? THANKS Priscilla Priscilla, If 'encap' isn't accepted on the main interface, your IOS most certainly doesn't support trunking and there isn't really any other info you need. You'll likely just need to upgrade to an IP Plus or Enterprise image. Or possibly a 12.2 image. Beware the memory requirements though. This is exactly what I went through last week. Once I loaded up an IP Plus image on a router with enough memory, 'encap' magically appeared as a valid input. Regards, Scott Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=59859t=59850 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Campus LAN Design w/2600 [7:59850]
Pris, I did the below on a 2621 router with the sh ver for ios code Larry Router(config)#int fa0/1 Router(config-if)#no ip address Router(config-if)#int fa0/1.1 Router(config-subif)#encap ? dot1Q IEEE 802.1Q Virtual LAN isl Inter Switch Link - Virtual LAN encapsulation sde IEEE 802.10 Virtual LAN - Secure Data Exchange tr-isl Token Ring Inter Switch Link - Virtual LAN encapsulation Router(config-subif)#encap dot1q ? IEEE 802.1Q VLAN ID required, range 1 - 0xFFF. Router(config-subif)#encap dot1q 10 Router(config-subif)#^Z ROM: System Bootstrap, Version 11.3(2)XA4, RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1) System image file is flash:c2600-js-mz.122-1.bin cisco 2621 (MPC860) processor (revision 0x102) with 58368K/7168K bytes of memory Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote: So, we started to implement the campus LAN design that I mentioned in previous messages, but we can't seem to do VLAN trunking on the darn 2600 router! When we do: int fa0/0 no ip address int fa0/0.1 encapsulation dot1q 100 The router claims that the encapsulation is invalid input. When we tried to do the IP address first, it says: Configuring IP routing on a LAN subinterface is only allowed if that subinterface is already configured as part of an IEEE 802.10, IEEE 802.1Q, or ISL vLAN. (That makes it sound like VLAN trunking is supported!?) IOS version is 12.1(5). He's using the Firewall Feature Set (CBAC stuff) es evidenced by ip inspect commands in his config. Does it not support VLAN trunking?? I've asked him to do show flash and show version so we can get more info. What else should I ask for? THANKS Priscilla Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=59864t=59850 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Campus LAN Design w/2600 [7:59850]
Larry Letterman wrote: Pris, I did the below on a 2621 router with the sh ver for ios code Larry Router(config)#int fa0/1 Router(config-if)#no ip address Router(config-if)#int fa0/1.1 Router(config-subif)#encap ? dot1Q IEEE 802.1Q Virtual LAN isl Inter Switch Link - Virtual LAN encapsulation sde IEEE 802.10 Virtual LAN - Secure Data Exchange tr-isl Token Ring Inter Switch Link - Virtual LAN encapsulation Router(config-subif)#encap dot1q ? IEEE 802.1Q VLAN ID required, range 1 - 0xFFF. Router(config-subif)#encap dot1q 10 Router(config-subif)#^Z ROM: System Bootstrap, Version 11.3(2)XA4, RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1) System image file is flash:c2600-js-mz.122-1.bin cisco 2621 (MPC860) processor (revision 0x102) with 58368K/7168K bytes of memory Larry, Is -js- an enterprise image or just IP Plus? Scott Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=59867t=59850 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Campus LAN Design w/2600 [7:59850]
a sh ver would be helpful. I have a 2621 running 12.7 ip plus that supports trunking: C2621A#sh ver Cisco Internetwork Operating System Software IOS (tm) C2600 Software (C2600-IS-M), Version 12.1(7b), RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1) Copyright (c) 1986-2002 by cisco Systems, Inc. Compiled Tue 05-Feb-02 22:16 by cmong Image text-base: 0x80008088, data-base: 0x80CBF5D0 C2621A#conf t Enter configuration commands, one per line. End with CNTL/Z. C2621A(config)#inter fa0/1.1 C2621A(config-subif)#encap C2621A(config-subif)#encapsulation dot C2621A(config-subif)#encapsulation dot1Q 1 C2621A(config-subif)# I generally keep the VLAN and suninterface the same, easier to keep straight. Dave Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote: So, we started to implement the campus LAN design that I mentioned in previous messages, but we can't seem to do VLAN trunking on the darn 2600 router! When we do: int fa0/0 no ip address int fa0/0.1 encapsulation dot1q 100 The router claims that the encapsulation is invalid input. When we tried to do the IP address first, it says: Configuring IP routing on a LAN subinterface is only allowed if that subinterface is already configured as part of an IEEE 802.10, IEEE 802.1Q, or ISL vLAN. (That makes it sound like VLAN trunking is supported!?) IOS version is 12.1(5). He's using the Firewall Feature Set (CBAC stuff) es evidenced by ip inspect commands in his config. Does it not support VLAN trunking?? I've asked him to do show flash and show version so we can get more info. What else should I ask for? THANKS Priscilla -- David Madland CCIE# 2016 Sr. Network Engineer Qwest Communications 612-664-3367 You don't make the poor richer by making the rich poorer. --Winston Churchill Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=59869t=59850 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Campus LAN Design w/2600 [7:59850]
Software Download File name Description Size 'Bytes' Date Published More Info c2600-js-mz.122-1d.bin ENTERPRISE PLUS 11504788 02/10/2002 10:01:38 s vermill wrote: Larry, Is -js- an enterprise image or just IP Plus? Scott Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=59874t=59850 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Campus LAN Design w/2600 [7:59850]
I guess he's just using an IOS image that doesn't support inter-VLAN routing. Can someone point me to a chart? I don't have a CCO login though. Here's his attempt to use the encapsulation command and a show version and show flash. RTR#config t Enter configuration commands, one per line. End with CNTL/Z. RTR(config)#int f0/0 RTR(config-if)#no ip address RTR(config-if)#int f0/0.1 RTR(config-subif)#encapsulation dot1q 100 ^ % Invalid input detected at '^' marker. RTR#show version Cisco Internetwork Operating System Software IOS (tm) C2600 Software (C2600-IO3-M), Version 12.1(5), RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1) Copyright (c) 1986-2000 by cisco Systems, Inc. Compiled Wed 25-Oct-00 11:13 by cmong Image text-base: 0x80008088, data-base: 0x8085F2D8 ROM: System Bootstrap, Version 11.3(2)XA4, RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1) RTR uptime is 22 hours, 17 minutes System returned to ROM by power-on System image file is flash:c2600-io3-mz.121-5.bin cisco 2621 (MPC860) processor (revision 0x101) with 20480K/4096K bytes of memory FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Campus LAN Design w/2600 [7:59850]
Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote: I guess he's just using an IOS image that doesn't support inter-VLAN routing. Can someone point me to a chart? I don't have a CCO login though. I've never found a chart and the Software Advisor and/or Feature Navigator on CCO can't always be relied upon (they don't go back far enough for one thing). You can get a good .pdf file that helps a bit but still isn't a final authority: http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/iosswrel/products_abc_ios_overview.html#abc01 Notice that after the platform ID (e.g. 2600) in the image name, a j suggests Enterprise code, while an s suggests IP Plus features (thanks Larry - I couldn't find my copy of the above earlier). I know from experience that trunking support was considered to be a Plus feature in the 12.1 train (not so sure about 12.2?). The good news is that you have 8M of flash to work with! Does your client have a login? Here's his attempt to use the encapsulation command and a show version and show flash. RTR#config t Enter configuration commands, one per line. End with CNTL/Z. RTR(config)#int f0/0 RTR(config-if)#no ip address RTR(config-if)#int f0/0.1 RTR(config-subif)#encapsulation dot1q 100 ^ % Invalid input detected at '^' marker. RTR#show version Cisco Internetwork Operating System Software IOS (tm) C2600 Software (C2600-IO3-M), Version 12.1(5), RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1) Copyright (c) 1986-2000 by cisco Systems, Inc. Compiled Wed 25-Oct-00 11:13 by cmong Image text-base: 0x80008088, data-base: 0x8085F2D8 ROM: System Bootstrap, Version 11.3(2)XA4, RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1) RTR uptime is 22 hours, 17 minutes System returned to ROM by power-on System image file is flash:c2600-io3-mz.121-5.bin cisco 2621 (MPC860) processor (revision 0x101) with 20480K/4096K bytes of memory . Processor board ID JAB040202S9 (1365741948) M860 processor: part number 0, mask 49 Bridging software. X.25 software, Version 3.0.0. 1 Ethernet/IEEE 802.3 interface(s) 2 FastEthernet/IEEE 802.3 interface(s) 1 Serial network interface(s) 32K bytes of non-volatile configuration memory. 8192K bytes of processor board System flash (Read/Write) Configuration register is 0x2102 FireMTNRTR#show flash System flash directory: File Length Name/status 1 4718616 c2600-io3-mz.121-5.bin [4718680 bytes used, 3669928 available, 8388608 total] 8192K bytes of processor board System flash (Read/Write) Thanks everyone for your help. Priscilla Larry Letterman wrote: Pris, I did the below on a 2621 router with the sh ver for ios code Larry Router(config)#int fa0/1 Router(config-if)#no ip address Router(config-if)#int fa0/1.1 Router(config-subif)#encap ? dot1Q IEEE 802.1Q Virtual LAN isl Inter Switch Link - Virtual LAN encapsulation sde IEEE 802.10 Virtual LAN - Secure Data Exchange tr-isl Token Ring Inter Switch Link - Virtual LAN encapsulation Router(config-subif)#encap dot1q ? IEEE 802.1Q VLAN ID required, range 1 - 0xFFF. Router(config-subif)#encap dot1q 10 Router(config-subif)#^Z ROM: System Bootstrap, Version 11.3(2)XA4, RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1) System image file is flash:c2600-js-mz.122-1.bin cisco 2621 (MPC860) processor (revision 0x102) with 58368K/7168K bytes of memory Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote: So, we started to implement the campus LAN design that I mentioned in previous messages, but we can't seem to do VLAN trunking on the darn 2600 router! When we do: int fa0/0 no ip address int fa0/0.1 encapsulation dot1q 100 The router claims that the encapsulation is invalid input. When we tried to do the IP address first, it says: Configuring IP routing on a LAN subinterface is only allowed if that subinterface is already configured as part of an IEEE 802.10, IEEE 802.1Q, or ISL vLAN. (That makes it sound like VLAN trunking is supported!?) IOS version is 12.1(5). He's using the Firewall Feature Set (CBAC stuff) es evidenced by ip inspect commands in his config. Does it not support VLAN trunking?? I've asked him to do show flash and show version so we can get more info. What else should I ask for? THANKS Priscilla Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=59876t=59850 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Campus LAN Design w/2600 [7:59850]
Try a plus image and you'll be set. Dave Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote: I guess he's just using an IOS image that doesn't support inter-VLAN routing. Can someone point me to a chart? I don't have a CCO login though. Here's his attempt to use the encapsulation command and a show version and show flash. RTR#config t Enter configuration commands, one per line. End with CNTL/Z. RTR(config)#int f0/0 RTR(config-if)#no ip address RTR(config-if)#int f0/0.1 RTR(config-subif)#encapsulation dot1q 100 ^ % Invalid input detected at '^' marker. RTR#show version Cisco Internetwork Operating System Software IOS (tm) C2600 Software (C2600-IO3-M), Version 12.1(5), RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1) Copyright (c) 1986-2000 by cisco Systems, Inc. Compiled Wed 25-Oct-00 11:13 by cmong Image text-base: 0x80008088, data-base: 0x8085F2D8 ROM: System Bootstrap, Version 11.3(2)XA4, RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1) RTR uptime is 22 hours, 17 minutes System returned to ROM by power-on System image file is flash:c2600-io3-mz.121-5.bin cisco 2621 (MPC860) processor (revision 0x101) with 20480K/4096K bytes of memory FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- David Madland CCIE# 2016 Sr. Network Engineer Qwest Communications 612-664-3367 You don't make the poor richer by making the rich poorer. --Winston Churchill Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=59878t=59850 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Campus LAN Design w/2600 [7:59850]
Scott, If you have access this URL will help: http://www.cisco.com/warp/customer/432/7.html Dave Larry Letterman wrote: Software Download File name Description Size 'Bytes' Date Published More Info c2600-js-mz.122-1d.bin ENTERPRISE PLUS 11504788 02/10/2002 10:01:38 s vermill wrote: Larry, Is -js- an enterprise image or just IP Plus? Scott -- David Madland CCIE# 2016 Sr. Network Engineer Qwest Communications 612-664-3367 You don't make the poor richer by making the rich poorer. --Winston Churchill Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=59879t=59850 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Campus LAN Design w/2600 [7:59850]
MADMAN wrote: Scott, If you have access this URL will help: http://www.cisco.com/warp/customer/432/7.html Dave Dave, That is excellent. Many thanks! I'd like to paste the part that breaks down the feature codes but since Cisco has put it behind a login, I'm a little hesitant to make public what they seem to have made private. I wonder why they did that? Anyway, thanks again. Scott Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=59881t=59850 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Campus LAN Design w/2600 [7:59850]
s vermill wrote: MADMAN wrote: Scott, If you have access this URL will help: http://www.cisco.com/warp/customer/432/7.html Dave Dave, That is excellent. Many thanks! I'd like to paste the part that breaks down the feature codes but since Cisco has put it behind a login, I'm a little hesitant to make public what they seem to have made private. I wonder why they did that? To thwart individual consultants! ;-) Seriously, I think you could post it. I think it's taught in CCNA and Cisco Network Academy classes, I just never paid much attention. If this is what it takes to be a Cisco consultant, I quit (i.e. having to understand horrid file names and humongous numbers of features sets and images, etc. ;-) Seriously, I need to hook this client up with a real Cisco SE, I think. Ther must be one up North. We are starved for talent in Southern Oregon. The economy died so completely that the few people with knowledge left town or started other businesses. I'm the only one left I think sometimes, and I'm really more of a writer and instructor... Thank goodness it's FRIDAY! :-) Thanks everyone for your help. Priscilla Anyway, thanks again. Scott Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=59886t=59850 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Campus LAN Design w/2600 [7:59850]
On May 19, 4:50pm, Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote: } } I guess he's just using an IOS image that doesn't support inter-VLAN } routing. Can someone point me to a chart? I don't have a CCO login though. Feature Navigator is always where to find the answer for questions like this; however, you need a CCO login to use it. There was a way that you could sign up for an account as a consultant, but I can't find it at the moment. Anyways, as others have said, he needs a PLUS image. This is the closest one to his current image, that I could find: IP/FW/IDS PLUS IPSEC 56 -- c2600-io3s56i-mz.12.1-5 (40/16) The numbers in parantheses indicate DRAM/Flash requirements. The question now is does he have a SmartNET contract and which feature sets is he licenced to use? If he is going to upgrade, then he should check for applicable security advisories ( http://www.cisco.com/go/psirt/ ) and get an IOS version that has the fixes. }-- End of excerpt from Priscilla Oppenheimer Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=59889t=59850 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Campus LAN Design w/2600 [7:59850]
Hi Prasicilla See the min IOS version required to support what i feel is 12.2(8). It doesnot require enterprise image i think.Ip PLUS will work without any encryption features and eneterprise features Example for naming convention sh ver C2600-ios-M C2600 platform ios is feature sets like I defines ip subset,O defines firewall,s defines Source route switch (SNMP, IP, BRIDGING, SRB).like this depending uponn feature sets. M indicates execution path Trunking(802.1 q) was introduced in 12.2 versions only that too on 2600,2695,3620,3640 and 3660 these platforms. this is what i thinkPriscilla Oppenheimer wrote: So, we started to implement the campus LAN design that I mentioned in previous messages, but we can't seem to do VLAN trunking on the darn 2600 router! When we do: int fa0/0 no ip address int fa0/0.1 encapsulation dot1q 100 The router claims that the encapsulation is invalid input. When we tried to do the IP address first, it says: Configuring IP routing on a LAN subinterface is only allowed if that subinterface is already configured as part of an IEEE 802.10, IEEE 802.1Q, or ISL vLAN. (That makes it sound like VLAN trunking is supported!?) IOS version is 12.1(5). He's using the Firewall Feature Set (CBAC stuff) es evidenced by ip inspect commands in his config. Does it not support VLAN trunking?? I've asked him to do show flash and show version so we can get more info. What else should I ask for? THANKS Priscilla Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=59898t=59850 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: RE: campus LAN Design w/DHCP Server [7:59724]
Thanks Scott! It does bode well, despite the weird Dest Unreachable (Port Unreachable) from the server. Thanks again. Priscilla s vermill wrote: Priscilla, Well, its been an interesting project. Unfortunately, the DHCP server app that I wound up trying (Vicomsoft) was so buggy that I couldnt keep it from crashing. Even when it was running, it was highly, highly unstable. Granted, it was a demo, but I would think a demo would have basic functionality. Furthermore, I couldnt get into the console port of the 2900XL. Tried everything. The darned port is fried. So here is what I came up with: 2621 | | | Foundry Networks switch | | | | | | DHCP Serv DHCP Client The 2621, with 64M of memory and 8M of flash, is running 12.1-18 IP Plus. I dont know much about the Foundry switch. It was straight out of the box just yesterday. I configured it with a dot1q trunk to the router, an access port in vlan 100 (192.168.1.0/24), and an access port in vlan 200 (192.168.2.0/24). The server (192.168.1.100) was attached to VLAN 100 and the client (192.168.2.?) to vlan 200. The router subinterfaces were the .1 address. Subinterface F0/0.2 had an IP helper address of 192.168.1.100. On a couple of occasions I moved the client to vlan 100. The server did actually work two or three times with a local client. It never once worked with a non-local client. The good news is that the DHCP Discovery crossed the vlans via the 2621 and looked to be in pretty good shape: Frame 44 (343 bytes on wire, 343 bytes captured) Arrival Time: Dec 21, 2002 18:01:21.694951000 Time delta from previous packet: 0.721309000 seconds Time relative to first packet: 40.720429000 seconds Frame Number: 44 Packet Length: 343 bytes Capture Length: 343 bytes Ethernet II, Src: 00:02:fd:1d:c0:20, Dst: 00:08:74:03:77:b5 Destination: 00:08:74:03:77:b5 (Dell_Com_03:77:b5) Source: 00:02:fd:1d:c0:20 (Cisco_1d:c0:20) Type: IP (0x0800) Internet Protocol, Src Addr: 192.168.2.1 (192.168.2.1), Dst Addr: 192.168.1.100 (192.168.1.100) Version: 4 Header length: 20 bytes Differentiated Services Field: 0x00 (DSCP 0x00: Default; ECN: 0x00) 00.. = Differentiated Services Codepoint: Default (0x00) ..0. = ECN-Capable Transport (ECT): 0 ...0 = ECN-CE: 0 Total Length: 329 Identification: 0x0061 Flags: 0x00 .0.. = Don't fragment: Not set ..0. = More fragments: Not set Fragment offset: 0 Time to live: 255 Protocol: UDP (0x11) Header checksum: 0x358d (correct) Source: 192.168.2.1 (192.168.2.1) Destination: 192.168.1.100 (192.168.1.100) User Datagram Protocol, Src Port: bootps (67), Dst Port: bootps (67) Source port: bootps (67) Destination port: bootps (67) Length: 309 Checksum: 0xde84 (correct) Bootstrap Protocol Message type: Boot Request (1) Hardware type: Ethernet Hardware address length: 6 Hops: 1 Transaction ID: 0xcb4d080c Seconds elapsed: 17250 Bootp flags: 0x8000 (Broadcast) 1... = Broadcast flag: Broadcast .000 = Reserved flags: 0x Client IP address: 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) Your (client) IP address: 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) Next server IP address: 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) Relay agent IP address: 192.168.2.1 (192.168.2.1) Client hardware address: 00:06:5b:e4:d3:97 Server host name not given Boot file name not given Magic cookie: (OK) Option 53: DHCP Message Type = DHCP Discover Unknown Option Code: 251 (1 bytes) Option 61: Client identifier Hardware type: Ethernet Client hardware address: 00:06:5b:e4:d3:97 Option 50: Requested IP Address = 192.168.1.2 Option 12: Host Name = laprmccarverGFE Option 60: Vendor class identifier = MSFT 5.0 Option 55: Parameter Request List 1 = Subnet Mask 15 = Domain Name 3 = Router Notice the relay agent address of 192.168.2.1. That bodes well. However, for some reason, this was the response: Frame 45 (70 bytes on wire, 70 bytes captured) Arrival Time: Dec 21, 2002 18:01:21.69501 Time delta from previous packet: 0.59000 seconds Time relative to first packet: 40.720488000 seconds Frame Number: 45 Packet Length: 70 bytes Capture Length: 70 bytes Ethernet II, Src: 00:08:74:03:77:b5, Dst: 00:02:fd:1d:c0:20 Destination: 00:02:fd:1d:c0:20 (Cisco_1d:c0:20) Source: 00:08:74:03:77:b5 (Dell_Com_03:77:b5) Type: IP (0x0800) Internet Protocol, Src Addr: 192.168.1.100 (192.168.1.100), Dst Addr: 192.168.2.1
RE: campus LAN design w/DHCP server [7:59578]
Priscilla, I havent forsaken you (yet). But heres the deal: My 2610 only has 24M of memory. I ignored the recommendation for at least 40M to run 12.1 IP Plus only to meet with disastrous results. I need IP Plus on this old clunker to enable dot1q (and Im pretty sure at least 12.1 also). So...I found what appears to be a 2620 in one of our labs. Theres a 2900XL nearby. I suspect I can fire the two up and get em going. However, the only module in the 2900 uplink slot is GigE. So does anyone know if I can configure one of the 24 access ports to trunk? I have minimal experience with the 2900XL and that was over a year ago. The real problem is that I dont have any servers in that lab at the moment. Does anyone know of a simple stand-alone DHCP application that will run on a Windows machine? If not, the best I can do at the moment using a 2600 would be to put a sniffer on 192.168.1.0 and a client on 192.168.2.0. The captured DHCP client requests should show whether or not the pertinent subinterface address is being plugged into giaddr. Regards, Scott s vermill wrote: Priscilla, I'm sure someone can verify this with a 2600 specifically. As far as DHCP in general, yes. We just did this with a much larger 6509-based network. No problems. The only difference, of course, is that the MSFC has virtual router interfaces per VLAN - not subinterfaces on a router on a stick. Can't see why DHCP itself would know or care. But I guess you can't know for sure what that subinterface on the 2600 will do until someone specifically verifies it. If you don't get such a response, I've got a 2600 laying around at the moment. I'll dig up a switch, set up a DHCP server, and mock 'er up for ya. Won't take long at all. Regards, Scott Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=59684t=59578 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: campus LAN design w/DHCP server [7:59646]
Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote: It's a fast Ethernet trunk, actually. I forgot to mention that. He does have some internal servers. Do you think in and out of a Fast Ethernet trunk will be less of a problem? The 2600 might be. He had a broadcast meltdown last week. Perhaps that's why he's concerned. He was using ghosting software. Symantec Ghost will kill a 2600, 4500, and RSP1 by itself if it is multicasting (which it should be, not broadcasting) and you are doing multicast routing (pim-sparse or pim-dense) and sometimes even when you disable MR. I know this from the school of hard knocks - you will have CPU starvation with a 100Mbps-capable LAN (maybe not at 10Mb, but then you would saturate the net). A 7200/NPE-300 can handle it nicely. DHCP isn't much of a problem, but when you enable the ip helper-address be sure to selectively disable (no ip forward-protocol) everything else you don't need (DNS, TFTP, NetBIOS, etc). Jeff Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=59678t=59646 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: campus LAN design w/DHCP server [7:59664]
Hey Priscilla, I feel about 10 times better knowing it's a fast ethernet :) If there's anyway to localize the traffic, such as putting department X's clients and servers on vlan 100, and department Y's clients/servers on the other, it'd be optimal. But even if you can't it should run pretty well. Worse comes to worse, they could always buy a 3550 and have that route between VLANs at like light speed. Which ghosting software is the client using? I thought that Ghost itself used multicast and was IGMP aware. Chuck Church CCIE #8776, MCNE, MCSE It's a fast Ethernet trunk, actually. I forgot to mention that. He does have some internal servers. Do you think in and out of a Fast Ethernet trunk will be less of a problem? You know my first reaction was also just move the subnet mask over. But he didn't seem to want to do that. He had a broadcast meltdown last week. Perhaps that's why he's concerned. He was using ghosting software. Thanks for the input! Priscilla Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=59664t=59664 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: campus LAN design w/DHCP server [7:59578]
There are no dumb questions. Lots of dumb answers, though ;-) We do this all the time when setting up Voice Vlans for AVVID. The configuration below details the operation of DHCP and the configuration required. You should be fine with the example you gave. http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk648/tk362/technologies_tech_note09186a 0080114aee.shtml Frank Jimenez, CCIE #5738 Systems Engineer Dallas Commercial Cisco Systems, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 7:18 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: campus LAN design w/DHCP server [7:59578] Sorry if this is a dumb question! ;-) I want to make sure this design will work before implementing it. The customer has been using 192.168.168.0/24 in one small flat LAN. He has run out of these addresses and is being hit by performance issues related to broadcasts. He wants to implement subnets and VLANs: VLAN 100 192.168.168.0/24 VLAN 200 192.168.169.0/24 New design: Internet | s0 2600 router e1 --- public servers e0 | dot1q trunk switch VLAN 200 VLAN 100 There is just one DHCP server. It will be in VLAN 100, address 192.168.168.10. The DHCP server will have 2 scopes for the 2 subnets. We're going to do inter-VLAN routing on the 2600 router. Will this config work as far as DHCP is concerned? interface ethernet 0 no ip address interface ethernet 0.1 encapsulation dot1q 100 ip address 192.168.168.1 255.255.255.0 interface ethernet 0.2 encapsulation dot1q 200 ip address 192.168.169.1 255.255.255.0 ip helper-address 192.168.168.10 Devices in VLAN 100 will broadcast and get to the DHCP server directly. The DHCP server is in their VLAN/subnet. Devices in VLAN 200 will broadcast. The router will hopefully pick up the broadcast, convert it to a unicast to the DHCP server and send it back out e0, with the GIADDR address filled in so the server will use the right scope. Sounds like it should work, but for some unknown reason, I couldn't find an example that showed this. Thanks so much for your help. You could save my Christmas by helping me verify (or poke holes) in this design! I just wanted to check on the DHCP aspect at this point. I can fix up the NAT and routing. My brain stopped working after the last egg nog, so help is needed! :-) Priscilla Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=59616t=59578 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: campus LAN design w/DHCP server [7:59646]
If everyone just goes to the internet, it'll work. But if you've got one or more servers internally, I'd be real afraid of trunking on a 10 mb interface. You'll reduce your broadcasts, but I think performance will suffer horribly crossing the router. Since you've run out of addresses on a /24, I assume you've got a couple hundred devices. Personally I'd just move the mask back one or 2 bits, making it a /22 or /23, and using the additional 1.0 or 1,2, and 3.0 subnets. There's things you can do to almost all OSs to reduce broadcasts. How many broadcasts are you seeing per second? If it's no more than 20 on average, I wouldn't even worry about it. Chuck Church CCIE #8776, MCNE, MCSE The customer has been using 192.168.168.0/24 in one small flat LAN. He has run out of these addresses and is being hit by performance issues related to broadcasts. He wants to implement subnets and VLANs: VLAN 100 192.168.168.0/24 VLAN 200 192.168.169.0/24 New design: Internet | s0 2600 router e1 --- public servers e0 | dot1q trunk switch VLAN 200 VLAN 100 There is just one DHCP server. It will be in VLAN 100, address 192.168.168.10. The DHCP server will have 2 scopes for the 2 subnets. We're going to do inter-VLAN routing on the 2600 router. Will this config work as far as DHCP is concerned? interface ethernet 0 no ip address interface ethernet 0.1 encapsulation dot1q 100 ip address 192.168.168.1 255.255.255.0 interface ethernet 0.2 encapsulation dot1q 200 ip address 192.168.169.1 255.255.255.0 ip helper-address 192.168.168.10 Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=59646t=59646 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: campus LAN design w/DHCP server [7:59646]
It's a fast Ethernet trunk, actually. I forgot to mention that. He does have some internal servers. Do you think in and out of a Fast Ethernet trunk will be less of a problem? You know my first reaction was also just move the subnet mask over. But he didn't seem to want to do that. He had a broadcast meltdown last week. Perhaps that's why he's concerned. He was using ghosting software. Thanks for the input! Priscilla Chuck Church wrote: If everyone just goes to the internet, it'll work. But if you've got one or more servers internally, I'd be real afraid of trunking on a 10 mb interface. You'll reduce your broadcasts, but I think performance will suffer horribly crossing the router. Since you've run out of addresses on a /24, I assume you've got a couple hundred devices. Personally I'd just move the mask back one or 2 bits, making it a /22 or /23, and using the additional 1.0 or 1,2, and 3.0 subnets. There's things you can do to almost all OSs to reduce broadcasts. How many broadcasts are you seeing per second? If it's no more than 20 on average, I wouldn't even worry about it. Chuck Church CCIE #8776, MCNE, MCSE The customer has been using 192.168.168.0/24 in one small flat LAN. He has run out of these addresses and is being hit by performance issues related to broadcasts. He wants to implement subnets and VLANs: VLAN 100 192.168.168.0/24 VLAN 200 192.168.169.0/24 New design: Internet | s0 2600 router e1 --- public servers e0 | dot1q trunk switch VLAN 200 VLAN 100 There is just one DHCP server. It will be in VLAN 100, address 192.168.168.10. The DHCP server will have 2 scopes for the 2 subnets. We're going to do inter-VLAN routing on the 2600 router. Will this config work as far as DHCP is concerned? interface ethernet 0 no ip address interface ethernet 0.1 encapsulation dot1q 100 ip address 192.168.168.1 255.255.255.0 interface ethernet 0.2 encapsulation dot1q 200 ip address 192.168.169.1 255.255.255.0 ip helper-address 192.168.168.10 Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=59648t=59646 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
campus LAN design w/DHCP server [7:59578]
Sorry if this is a dumb question! ;-) I want to make sure this design will work before implementing it. The customer has been using 192.168.168.0/24 in one small flat LAN. He has run out of these addresses and is being hit by performance issues related to broadcasts. He wants to implement subnets and VLANs: VLAN 100 192.168.168.0/24 VLAN 200 192.168.169.0/24 New design: Internet | s0 2600 router e1 --- public servers e0 | dot1q trunk switch VLAN 200 VLAN 100 There is just one DHCP server. It will be in VLAN 100, address 192.168.168.10. The DHCP server will have 2 scopes for the 2 subnets. We're going to do inter-VLAN routing on the 2600 router. Will this config work as far as DHCP is concerned? interface ethernet 0 no ip address interface ethernet 0.1 encapsulation dot1q 100 ip address 192.168.168.1 255.255.255.0 interface ethernet 0.2 encapsulation dot1q 200 ip address 192.168.169.1 255.255.255.0 ip helper-address 192.168.168.10 Devices in VLAN 100 will broadcast and get to the DHCP server directly. The DHCP server is in their VLAN/subnet. Devices in VLAN 200 will broadcast. The router will hopefully pick up the broadcast, convert it to a unicast to the DHCP server and send it back out e0, with the GIADDR address filled in so the server will use the right scope. Sounds like it should work, but for some unknown reason, I couldn't find an example that showed this. Thanks so much for your help. You could save my Christmas by helping me verify (or poke holes) in this design! I just wanted to check on the DHCP aspect at this point. I can fix up the NAT and routing. My brain stopped working after the last egg nog, so help is needed! :-) Priscilla Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=59578t=59578 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: campus LAN design w/DHCP server [7:59578]
Priscilla, I'm sure someone can verify this with a 2600 specifically. As far as DHCP in general, yes. We just did this with a much larger 6509-based network. No problems. The only difference, of course, is that the MSFC has virtual router interfaces per VLAN - not subinterfaces on a router on a stick. Can't see why DHCP itself would know or care. But I guess you can't know for sure what that subinterface on the 2600 will do until someone specifically verifies it. If you don't get such a response, I've got a 2600 laying around at the moment. I'll dig up a switch, set up a DHCP server, and mock 'er up for ya. Won't take long at all. Regards, Scott Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=59580t=59578 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: campus LAN design w/DHCP server [7:59578]
No more drinks for you, pris Design seems like it will work...till an intern puts up a nother dhcp server on the same vlan and people get wrong address's :-P Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote: Sorry if this is a dumb question! ;-) I want to make sure this design will work before implementing it. The customer has been using 192.168.168.0/24 in one small flat LAN. He has run out of these addresses and is being hit by performance issues related to broadcasts. He wants to implement subnets and VLANs: VLAN 100 192.168.168.0/24 VLAN 200 192.168.169.0/24 New design: Internet | s0 2600 router e1 --- public servers e0 | dot1q trunk switch VLAN 200 VLAN 100 There is just one DHCP server. It will be in VLAN 100, address 192.168.168.10. The DHCP server will have 2 scopes for the 2 subnets. We're going to do inter-VLAN routing on the 2600 router. Will this config work as far as DHCP is concerned? interface ethernet 0 no ip address interface ethernet 0.1 encapsulation dot1q 100 ip address 192.168.168.1 255.255.255.0 interface ethernet 0.2 encapsulation dot1q 200 ip address 192.168.169.1 255.255.255.0 ip helper-address 192.168.168.10 Devices in VLAN 100 will broadcast and get to the DHCP server directly. The DHCP server is in their VLAN/subnet. Devices in VLAN 200 will broadcast. The router will hopefully pick up the broadcast, convert it to a unicast to the DHCP server and send it back out e0, with the GIADDR address filled in so the server will use the right scope. Sounds like it should work, but for some unknown reason, I couldn't find an example that showed this. Thanks so much for your help. You could save my Christmas by helping me verify (or poke holes) in this design! I just wanted to check on the DHCP aspect at this point. I can fix up the NAT and routing. My brain stopped working after the last egg nog, so help is needed! :-) Priscilla Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=59586t=59578 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: campus LAN design w/DHCP server [7:59578]
Maybe what I really need for Christmas is a new router. ;-) My routers are too old to do this sort of stuff. It would be terrific if you could mock it up. I'm just not totally conviced the router will behave the way it obviously should. Could be the egg nog though. Thank-you. I am indebted to you! Priscilla s vermill wrote: Priscilla, I'm sure someone can verify this with a 2600 specifically. As far as DHCP in general, yes. We just did this with a much larger 6509-based network. No problems. The only difference, of course, is that the MSFC has virtual router interfaces per VLAN - not subinterfaces on a router on a stick. Can't see why DHCP itself would know or care. But I guess you can't know for sure what that subinterface on the 2600 will do until someone specifically verifies it. If you don't get such a response, I've got a 2600 laying around at the moment. I'll dig up a switch, set up a DHCP server, and mock 'er up for ya. Won't take long at all. Regards, Scott Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=59587t=59578 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: LAN Design [7:54023]
depends on how you define the uber layers. here's mine: layer 8 - religion (in the sense of big/little endian) layer 9 - politics layer 10 - economics. have been bitten by each at one point or another, so they are relevant but contextual. thanks. - Original Message - From: Tom Lisa To: Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2002 1:45 AM Subject: Re: LAN Design [7:54023] Yes, Sem1 does concentrate on Layer 1. We teach the concepts from the bottom up. But, as we all know, Top Down Network Design is best. Didn't someone write a book on it? All good design starts by getting Layer 8 issues resolved first. Prof. Tom Lisa, CCAI Community College of Southern Nevada Cisco ATC/Regional Networking Academy Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote: Tom Lisa wrote: I'm hurt to say the least. I touch on all of those, albeit briefly. After all, I'm not teaching CCDA/DP courses. Prof. Tom Lisa, CCAI Community College of Southern Nevada Cisco ATC/Regional Networking Academy I'm sure experienced, knowledgable professors such as yourself do teach design in a well-rounded fashion. ;-) It's more the Academy course materials I was concerned about. They teach design from a cabling, hardware, product viewpoint, which does have some value, by the way. As Chuck mentioned, you have to think about the positioning of wiring closets, the MDF, etc. Cisco Networking Academy harps on that a lot, from what I remember. Priscilla Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote: Thank-you very much for the recommendations for Top-Down Network Design. I probably don't express my gratitude often enough to the many people who bought the book. I suspect that we may be helping a Cisco Networking Academy student with homework. ;-) This sounds a lot like the exercises they do. That program has a tendency to teach a bottom-up design methodology that focuses on physcial size and technology/media selection, before gaining an understanding for: business and political concerns budget user expectations for reliability, response time, etc. application requirements for bandwidth, delay, etc. appliation behavior in terms of broadcasts, traffic patterns, etc. You all did a good job of pointing out the importantance of these concepts, so I will say no more. Priscilla Chuck's Long Road wrote: Tim Medley wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... If you are serious about designing this netwoek and designing ir correctly for scalability and functionality, pick up a good network design book. My reccomendation is Top Down Network Design, by Priscilla Openheimer. U have two copies one at home and one at the office, I refer to this tome quite often. Great book, excellent methodology. CL: a good book indeed. the irony here is that oftentimes, particularly in smaller environments, the person who has to make these decisions is under a severe time constraint, and does not have time to attain the background that all of us study. back in the days when I was a network manager, I never had time to learn this stuff. my own road to correct network thinking began after I was downsized. :- Tim Medley, CCNP+Voice, CCDP, CWNA Sr. Network Architect VoIP Group iReadyWorld -Original Message- From: Jimmy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 11:01 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: LAN Design [7:54023] If i have to design network for 3 storey on a building. There are around 200-300 workstations in 2 storey each. Is it advisable to use Ethernet to link them up. As for the other storey it is for admin purpose. The distance is around 150m between the further storey. However it is possible to put a switch/router at the middle for interconnect. Cheers, Jimmy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=54218t=54023 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: LAN Design [7:54023]
Chuck, Originally I got the oversubscribe numbers from extreme a few years ago... Now days, with fast switches, it makes no real diference... the rationale is that all ports wont be active at the same timeso you can oversubscribe the access switches by 3 or 4 to 1 Chuck's Long Road wrote: Larry Letterman wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Jimmy, The access switch(users) should not be oversubscribed by more than 3 to 1in my opinion.. the total user bandwidth if you have a 12 port switch at 100 mb per port is 1.2 gb...the switch needs to be able to handle at least 400 mb of thruput CL: I'm always curious about numbers. Long evenings in night school taking management courses. So if you don't mind, what is the rationale for this ratio? CL: just looking for a bit more education also the core switches should be faster than the access switches below it if the core switch is 100mb, then the user access switches should 10 mb switches with a 100mb uplink to the core Jimmy wrote: First of all, thank for the wonderful response. So from what you all have said. If the user is for normal purpose like running some application on servers and access the Internet. Will a 100Mbps be sufficient for 300 users. As for the users, they will be splitted into several group of around 15-20 each.Or a 10Mbps switch will be more than sufficient for it. Can i calculate the BW for each user in this manner: 100M / 300 (no of user) Assuming full usage. Let say i have around 3 storey of about 300 users each, The backbone switch should be 10x the BW of each floor rite? Cheers, Jimmy -- Larry Letterman Network Engineer Cisco Systems Inc. -- Larry Letterman Network Engineer Cisco Systems Inc. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=54188t=54023 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: LAN Design [7:54023]
Larry Letterman wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Chuck, Originally I got the oversubscribe numbers from extreme a few years ago... Now days, with fast switches, it makes no real diference... CL: numbers are always interesting. especially when compared to what the various vendors provide physically. CL: for example, all the major vendors ( Cisco and the pack ) sell 48 port boxes with two gig ports, presumably for uplink. Using that 4 to 1 number, all those boxes are at the limit. CL: OTOH, I sometimes think all this backplane discussion is overblown. In high end server farms it might be likely that all your devices are transmitting AND receiving at close to full wire speed simultaneously. In the user community, however, I would highly doubt that you could find any workgroup in which ALL ( or any significant proportion ) devices were sending and receiving at wire speed the rationale is that all ports wont be active at the same timeso you can oversubscribe the access switches by 3 or 4 to 1 Chuck's Long Road wrote: Larry Letterman wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Jimmy, The access switch(users) should not be oversubscribed by more than 3 to 1in my opinion.. the total user bandwidth if you have a 12 port switch at 100 mb per port is 1.2 gb...the switch needs to be able to handle at least 400 mb of thruput CL: I'm always curious about numbers. Long evenings in night school taking management courses. So if you don't mind, what is the rationale for this ratio? CL: just looking for a bit more education also the core switches should be faster than the access switches below it if the core switch is 100mb, then the user access switches should 10 mb switches with a 100mb uplink to the core Jimmy wrote: First of all, thank for the wonderful response. So from what you all have said. If the user is for normal purpose like running some application on servers and access the Internet. Will a 100Mbps be sufficient for 300 users. As for the users, they will be splitted into several group of around 15-20 each.Or a 10Mbps switch will be more than sufficient for it. Can i calculate the BW for each user in this manner: 100M / 300 (no of user) Assuming full usage. Let say i have around 3 storey of about 300 users each, The backbone switch should be 10x the BW of each floor rite? Cheers, Jimmy -- Larry Letterman Network Engineer Cisco Systems Inc. -- Larry Letterman Network Engineer Cisco Systems Inc. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=54245t=54023 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: LAN Design [7:54023]
1- what media are the floors going to coonect with? 2- what are the core routers/switches going to have installed( gig or copper)? 3- what apps are going to be on the floors and the admin floor ? 4- what protocols are running on the network? 5- is it all going to be layer 3 or a mix of L3 and L2 ? Larry Letterman Data Center Design and Implementation Team Cisco Systems, San Jose Tim Medley wrote: If you are serious about designing this netwoek and designing ir correctly for scalability and functionality, pick up a good network design book. My reccomendation is Top Down Network Design, by Priscilla Openheimer. U have two copies one at home and one at the office, I refer to this tome quite often. Great book, excellent methodology. Tim Medley, CCNP+Voice, CCDP, CWNA Sr. Network Architect VoIP Group iReadyWorld -Original Message- From: Jimmy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 11:01 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: LAN Design [7:54023] If i have to design network for 3 storey on a building. There are around 200-300 workstations in 2 storey each. Is it advisable to use Ethernet to link them up. As for the other storey it is for admin purpose. The distance is around 150m between the further storey. However it is possible to put a switch/router at the middle for interconnect. Cheers, Jimmy -- Larry Letterman Network Engineer Cisco Systems Inc. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=54032t=54023 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: LAN Design [7:54023]
Let say if i use a 100Mbps switch for 300 user for each floor. Will it be very slow? How do i really calculate the BW for each user. Doing an approximation? 100M/300 ? Cheers, Jimmy Jimmy wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... If i have to design network for 3 storey on a building. There are around 200-300 workstations in 2 storey each. Is it advisable to use Ethernet to link them up. As for the other storey it is for admin purpose. The distance is around 150m between the further storey. However it is possible to put a switch/router at the middle for interconnect. Cheers, Jimmy Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=54034t=54023 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: LAN Design [7:54023]
which platform are you going to use for 300 users... 6500 ? 4006 ? or multiple stackables ? Jimmy wrote: Let say if i use a 100Mbps switch for 300 user for each floor. Will it be very slow? How do i really calculate the BW for each user. Doing an approximation? 100M/300 ? Cheers, Jimmy Jimmy wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... If i have to design network for 3 storey on a building. There are around 200-300 workstations in 2 storey each. Is it advisable to use Ethernet to link them up. As for the other storey it is for admin purpose. The distance is around 150m between the further storey. However it is possible to put a switch/router at the middle for interconnect. Cheers, Jimmy -- Larry Letterman Network Engineer Cisco Systems Inc. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=54039t=54023 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: LAN Design [7:54023]
hmm...Let don't talk about product. Just for a general view. Will a normal 100Mbps switch able to support 300 user? Is it realistic in real life application? Larry Letterman wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... which platform are you going to use for 300 users... 6500 ? 4006 ? or multiple stackables ? Jimmy wrote: Let say if i use a 100Mbps switch for 300 user for each floor. Will it be very slow? How do i really calculate the BW for each user. Doing an approximation? 100M/300 ? Cheers, Jimmy Jimmy wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... If i have to design network for 3 storey on a building. There are around 200-300 workstations in 2 storey each. Is it advisable to use Ethernet to link them up. As for the other storey it is for admin purpose. The distance is around 150m between the further storey. However it is possible to put a switch/router at the middle for interconnect. Cheers, Jimmy -- Larry Letterman Network Engineer Cisco Systems Inc. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=54044t=54023 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: LAN Design [7:54023]
Depends what your traffic profile is like, and your network environment. Remember that 300 users is probably getting up there as far as one broadcast domain is concerned. What do the users do? Just a little email and office documents, or do they manipulate large graphics files etc? Tons of things to think about This is a good book worth obtaining: http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/1578700698/ref=sr_aps_books_1_1 /202-2253176-9790258 Symon -Original Message- From: Jimmy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 25 September 2002 10:17 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: LAN Design [7:54023] hmm...Let don't talk about product. Just for a general view. Will a normal 100Mbps switch able to support 300 user? Is it realistic in real life application? Larry Letterman wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... which platform are you going to use for 300 users... 6500 ? 4006 ? or multiple stackables ? Jimmy wrote: Let say if i use a 100Mbps switch for 300 user for each floor. Will it be very slow? How do i really calculate the BW for each user. Doing an approximation? 100M/300 ? Cheers, Jimmy Jimmy wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... If i have to design network for 3 storey on a building. There are around 200-300 workstations in 2 storey each. Is it advisable to use Ethernet to link them up. As for the other storey it is for admin purpose. The distance is around 150m between the further storey. However it is possible to put a switch/router at the middle for interconnect. Cheers, Jimmy -- Larry Letterman Network Engineer Cisco Systems Inc. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=54046t=54023 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: LAN Design [7:54023]
as a rule of thumb 10mbps ethernet to the user end station is fine for typical user applications in businesses where the network plant is switched - exchange, file sharing, etc. servers on 100mbps. i'm told that more data intensive applications may require 100mbps ethernet to the desktop, but i haven't run into any yet. that said, before making any design decisions first understand the nature of the applications and the kind of traffic they generate. then apply to your proposed physical layout. it is similar to the primary rule of woodworking; measure twice, cut once. thanks. - Original Message - From: Jimmy To: Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2002 5:17 AM Subject: Re: LAN Design [7:54023] hmm...Let don't talk about product. Just for a general view. Will a normal 100Mbps switch able to support 300 user? Is it realistic in real life application? Larry Letterman wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... which platform are you going to use for 300 users... 6500 ? 4006 ? or multiple stackables ? Jimmy wrote: Let say if i use a 100Mbps switch for 300 user for each floor. Will it be very slow? How do i really calculate the BW for each user. Doing an approximation? 100M/300 ? Cheers, Jimmy Jimmy wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... If i have to design network for 3 storey on a building. There are around 200-300 workstations in 2 storey each. Is it advisable to use Ethernet to link them up. As for the other storey it is for admin purpose. The distance is around 150m between the further storey. However it is possible to put a switch/router at the middle for interconnect. Cheers, Jimmy -- Larry Letterman Network Engineer Cisco Systems Inc. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=54048t=54023 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: LAN Design [7:54023]
Allen, I agree with you completed, I will say that 99.99% of the time 10mbps for end stations is fine, if you have some users that may need more than 10mbps then you need to really study and fully understand the type of traffic is being generated my these users and then you may have to take a different approach. Juan Blanco -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Garrett Allen Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2002 6:39 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: LAN Design [7:54023] as a rule of thumb 10mbps ethernet to the user end station is fine for typical user applications in businesses where the network plant is switched - exchange, file sharing, etc. servers on 100mbps. i'm told that more data intensive applications may require 100mbps ethernet to the desktop, but i haven't run into any yet. that said, before making any design decisions first understand the nature of the applications and the kind of traffic they generate. then apply to your proposed physical layout. it is similar to the primary rule of woodworking; measure twice, cut once. thanks. - Original Message - From: Jimmy To: Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2002 5:17 AM Subject: Re: LAN Design [7:54023] hmm...Let don't talk about product. Just for a general view. Will a normal 100Mbps switch able to support 300 user? Is it realistic in real life application? Larry Letterman wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... which platform are you going to use for 300 users... 6500 ? 4006 ? or multiple stackables ? Jimmy wrote: Let say if i use a 100Mbps switch for 300 user for each floor. Will it be very slow? How do i really calculate the BW for each user. Doing an approximation? 100M/300 ? Cheers, Jimmy Jimmy wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... If i have to design network for 3 storey on a building. There are around 200-300 workstations in 2 storey each. Is it advisable to use Ethernet to link them up. As for the other storey it is for admin purpose. The distance is around 150m between the further storey. However it is possible to put a switch/router at the middle for interconnect. Cheers, Jimmy -- Larry Letterman Network Engineer Cisco Systems Inc. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=54052t=54023 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: LAN Design [7:54023]
Always allow room for growth, I would implement Core gigabit switch that interefaces with at least 3 other switches. Cheers, Joe Jimmy wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... If i have to design network for 3 storey on a building. There are around 200-300 workstations in 2 storey each. Is it advisable to use Ethernet to link them up. As for the other storey it is for admin purpose. The distance is around 150m between the further storey. However it is possible to put a switch/router at the middle for interconnect. Cheers, Jimmy Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=54054t=54023 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: LAN Design [7:54023]
The product makes a big difference. Are you planning to have one switch with 300 ports or 30 switches with 12 ports? Are you planning to use VLANs? If so will there be more than 64? The traffic pattern makes a huge difference as does the network design. If you're using 30 switches daisy-chained with all the servers and Internet connection at one end, I'd say you're looking for either job security or a quick termination. If your design if for a large chassis switch like a 6500, you probably won't have a problem -- unless all your client machines want to load applications from a single server connected at 100Mbps. What is your *real life* application? My network has several thousand users over several hundred switches with mostly 100Mbps uplinks between switches. Life is fine until someone runs an IRC bot or multiple people start Kazaa/Morpheus/Gnutella/etc. Then we shut off their port. :-) We even manage to run multicast audio and video. Access switches include models 1900, 2900XL, 3500XL, 4006, 5005, 5505 and 5513. The core is 3-5513 with dual everything (well, the important stuff). One other question... How much money do you want to spend? Ken Jimmy 09/25/02 02:17AM hmm...Let don't talk about product. Just for a general view. Will a normal 100Mbps switch able to support 300 user? Is it realistic in real life application? Larry Letterman wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... which platform are you going to use for 300 users... 6500 ? 4006 ? or multiple stackables ? Jimmy wrote: Let say if i use a 100Mbps switch for 300 user for each floor. Will it be very slow? How do i really calculate the BW for each user. Doing an approximation? 100M/300 ? Cheers, Jimmy Jimmy wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... If i have to design network for 3 storey on a building. There are around 200-300 workstations in 2 storey each. Is it advisable to use Ethernet to link them up. As for the other storey it is for admin purpose. The distance is around 150m between the further storey. However it is possible to put a switch/router at the middle for interconnect. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=54069t=54023 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: LAN Design [7:54023]
Jimmy wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... hmm...Let don't talk about product. Just for a general view. Will a normal 100Mbps switch able to support 300 user? Is it realistic in real life application? CL: good idea. so let's start with the fundamentals as I understand them. assume cat 5 or cat 5e to all stations. assume three floors. question: number of users per floor? question: are you pulling new cable or using existing? question: all three floors have wiring to a single wiring closet on on floor ( main computer room ) or do you have a main computer room and a data clost on each floor? if there is a closet on each floor, how are they connected now? are you willing to pull fiber between the floors in this case? CL: this last question can help greatly in sorting out equipment possibilities question: are there any general security considerations that vlans would address? CL: I ask this one because people start throwing vlans at problems without thinking. For example, if you have only one or two servers that everyone has to authenticate against and use, then vlans don't necessarily do anything for you. some folks have correctly pointed out that 300 users is at the very high end of rule of thumb broadcast domain limits. question: is budget a concern? if one solution comes in at 150,000 will your management have apoplexy? CL:my employer has lots of idle sales engineers who would just love to talk to you, not to mention sell you something :- Larry Letterman wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... which platform are you going to use for 300 users... 6500 ? 4006 ? or multiple stackables ? Jimmy wrote: Let say if i use a 100Mbps switch for 300 user for each floor. Will it be very slow? How do i really calculate the BW for each user. Doing an approximation? 100M/300 ? Cheers, Jimmy Jimmy wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... If i have to design network for 3 storey on a building. There are around 200-300 workstations in 2 storey each. Is it advisable to use Ethernet to link them up. As for the other storey it is for admin purpose. The distance is around 150m between the further storey. However it is possible to put a switch/router at the middle for interconnect. Cheers, Jimmy -- Larry Letterman Network Engineer Cisco Systems Inc. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=54073t=54023 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: LAN Design [7:54023]
Tim Medley wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... If you are serious about designing this netwoek and designing ir correctly for scalability and functionality, pick up a good network design book. My reccomendation is Top Down Network Design, by Priscilla Openheimer. U have two copies one at home and one at the office, I refer to this tome quite often. Great book, excellent methodology. CL: a good book indeed. the irony here is that oftentimes, particularly in smaller environments, the person who has to make these decisions is under a severe time constraint, and does not have time to attain the background that all of us study. back in the days when I was a network manager, I never had time to learn this stuff. my own road to correct network thinking began after I was downsized. :- Tim Medley, CCNP+Voice, CCDP, CWNA Sr. Network Architect VoIP Group iReadyWorld -Original Message- From: Jimmy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 11:01 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: LAN Design [7:54023] If i have to design network for 3 storey on a building. There are around 200-300 workstations in 2 storey each. Is it advisable to use Ethernet to link them up. As for the other storey it is for admin purpose. The distance is around 150m between the further storey. However it is possible to put a switch/router at the middle for interconnect. Cheers, Jimmy Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=54078t=54023 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: LAN Design [7:54023]
Chuck's Long Road wrote: CL:my employer has lots of idle sales engineers who would just love to talk to you, not to mention sell you something :- So does Mine :) :Larry Letterman Cisco... Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=54080t=54023 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: LAN Design [7:54023]
Thank-you very much for the recommendations for Top-Down Network Design. I probably don't express my gratitude often enough to the many people who bought the book. I suspect that we may be helping a Cisco Networking Academy student with homework. ;-) This sounds a lot like the exercises they do. That program has a tendency to teach a bottom-up design methodology that focuses on physcial size and technology/media selection, before gaining an understanding for: business and political concerns budget user expectations for reliability, response time, etc. application requirements for bandwidth, delay, etc. appliation behavior in terms of broadcasts, traffic patterns, etc. You all did a good job of pointing out the importantance of these concepts, so I will say no more. Priscilla Chuck's Long Road wrote: Tim Medley wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... If you are serious about designing this netwoek and designing ir correctly for scalability and functionality, pick up a good network design book. My reccomendation is Top Down Network Design, by Priscilla Openheimer. U have two copies one at home and one at the office, I refer to this tome quite often. Great book, excellent methodology. CL: a good book indeed. the irony here is that oftentimes, particularly in smaller environments, the person who has to make these decisions is under a severe time constraint, and does not have time to attain the background that all of us study. back in the days when I was a network manager, I never had time to learn this stuff. my own road to correct network thinking began after I was downsized. :- Tim Medley, CCNP+Voice, CCDP, CWNA Sr. Network Architect VoIP Group iReadyWorld -Original Message- From: Jimmy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 11:01 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: LAN Design [7:54023] If i have to design network for 3 storey on a building. There are around 200-300 workstations in 2 storey each. Is it advisable to use Ethernet to link them up. As for the other storey it is for admin purpose. The distance is around 150m between the further storey. However it is possible to put a switch/router at the middle for interconnect. Cheers, Jimmy Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=54093t=54023 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: LAN Design [7:54023]
I'm hurt to say the least. I touch on all of those, albeit briefly. After all, I'm not teaching CCDA/DP courses. Prof. Tom Lisa, CCAI Community College of Southern Nevada Cisco ATC/Regional Networking Academy Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote: Thank-you very much for the recommendations for Top-Down Network Design. I probably don't express my gratitude often enough to the many people who bought the book. I suspect that we may be helping a Cisco Networking Academy student with homework. ;-) This sounds a lot like the exercises they do. That program has a tendency to teach a bottom-up design methodology that focuses on physcial size and technology/media selection, before gaining an understanding for: business and political concerns budget user expectations for reliability, response time, etc. application requirements for bandwidth, delay, etc. appliation behavior in terms of broadcasts, traffic patterns, etc. You all did a good job of pointing out the importantance of these concepts, so I will say no more. Priscilla Chuck's Long Road wrote: Tim Medley wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... If you are serious about designing this netwoek and designing ir correctly for scalability and functionality, pick up a good network design book. My reccomendation is Top Down Network Design, by Priscilla Openheimer. U have two copies one at home and one at the office, I refer to this tome quite often. Great book, excellent methodology. CL: a good book indeed. the irony here is that oftentimes, particularly in smaller environments, the person who has to make these decisions is under a severe time constraint, and does not have time to attain the background that all of us study. back in the days when I was a network manager, I never had time to learn this stuff. my own road to correct network thinking began after I was downsized. :- Tim Medley, CCNP+Voice, CCDP, CWNA Sr. Network Architect VoIP Group iReadyWorld -Original Message- From: Jimmy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 11:01 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: LAN Design [7:54023] If i have to design network for 3 storey on a building. There are around 200-300 workstations in 2 storey each. Is it advisable to use Ethernet to link them up. As for the other storey it is for admin purpose. The distance is around 150m between the further storey. However it is possible to put a switch/router at the middle for interconnect. Cheers, Jimmy Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=54140t=54023 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: LAN Design [7:54023]
LOL Tim Medley, CCNP+Voice, CCDP, CWNA Sr. Network Architect VoIP Group iReadyWorld -Original Message- From: Larry Letterman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2002 12:48 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: LAN Design [7:54023] Chuck's Long Road wrote: CL:my employer has lots of idle sales engineers who would just love to talk to you, not to mention sell you something :- So does Mine :) :Larry Letterman Cisco... Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=54148t=54023 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: LAN Design [7:54023]
Hey Priscilla, Do you have any new books planned? tm Tim Medley, CCNP+Voice, CCDP, CWNA Sr. Network Architect VoIP Group iReadyWorld -Original Message- From: Priscilla Oppenheimer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2002 3:07 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: LAN Design [7:54023] Thank-you very much for the recommendations for Top-Down Network Design. I probably don't express my gratitude often enough to the many people who bought the book. I suspect that we may be helping a Cisco Networking Academy student with homework. ;-) This sounds a lot like the exercises they do. That program has a tendency to teach a bottom-up design methodology that focuses on physcial size and technology/media selection, before gaining an understanding for: business and political concerns budget user expectations for reliability, response time, etc. application requirements for bandwidth, delay, etc. appliation behavior in terms of broadcasts, traffic patterns, etc. You all did a good job of pointing out the importantance of these concepts, so I will say no more. Priscilla Chuck's Long Road wrote: Tim Medley wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... If you are serious about designing this netwoek and designing ir correctly for scalability and functionality, pick up a good network design book. My reccomendation is Top Down Network Design, by Priscilla Openheimer. U have two copies one at home and one at the office, I refer to this tome quite often. Great book, excellent methodology. CL: a good book indeed. the irony here is that oftentimes, particularly in smaller environments, the person who has to make these decisions is under a severe time constraint, and does not have time to attain the background that all of us study. back in the days when I was a network manager, I never had time to learn this stuff. my own road to correct network thinking began after I was downsized. :- Tim Medley, CCNP+Voice, CCDP, CWNA Sr. Network Architect VoIP Group iReadyWorld -Original Message- From: Jimmy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 11:01 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: LAN Design [7:54023] If i have to design network for 3 storey on a building. There are around 200-300 workstations in 2 storey each. Is it advisable to use Ethernet to link them up. As for the other storey it is for admin purpose. The distance is around 150m between the further storey. However it is possible to put a switch/router at the middle for interconnect. Cheers, Jimmy Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=54152t=54023 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: LAN Design [7:54023]
Tim Medley wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Hey Priscilla, Do you have any new books planned? CL: Where you been, sir? http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0471210137/qid=1032997494/sr=1 -2/ref=sr_1_2/102-6211460-1560114?v=glance ( definitely watch the wrap ) tm Tim Medley, CCNP+Voice, CCDP, CWNA Sr. Network Architect VoIP Group iReadyWorld -Original Message- From: Priscilla Oppenheimer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2002 3:07 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: LAN Design [7:54023] Thank-you very much for the recommendations for Top-Down Network Design. I probably don't express my gratitude often enough to the many people who bought the book. I suspect that we may be helping a Cisco Networking Academy student with homework. ;-) This sounds a lot like the exercises they do. That program has a tendency to teach a bottom-up design methodology that focuses on physcial size and technology/media selection, before gaining an understanding for: business and political concerns budget user expectations for reliability, response time, etc. application requirements for bandwidth, delay, etc. appliation behavior in terms of broadcasts, traffic patterns, etc. You all did a good job of pointing out the importantance of these concepts, so I will say no more. Priscilla Chuck's Long Road wrote: Tim Medley wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... If you are serious about designing this netwoek and designing ir correctly for scalability and functionality, pick up a good network design book. My reccomendation is Top Down Network Design, by Priscilla Openheimer. U have two copies one at home and one at the office, I refer to this tome quite often. Great book, excellent methodology. CL: a good book indeed. the irony here is that oftentimes, particularly in smaller environments, the person who has to make these decisions is under a severe time constraint, and does not have time to attain the background that all of us study. back in the days when I was a network manager, I never had time to learn this stuff. my own road to correct network thinking began after I was downsized. :- Tim Medley, CCNP+Voice, CCDP, CWNA Sr. Network Architect VoIP Group iReadyWorld -Original Message- From: Jimmy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 11:01 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: LAN Design [7:54023] If i have to design network for 3 storey on a building. There are around 200-300 workstations in 2 storey each. Is it advisable to use Ethernet to link them up. As for the other storey it is for admin purpose. The distance is around 150m between the further storey. However it is possible to put a switch/router at the middle for interconnect. Cheers, Jimmy Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=54154t=54023 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: LAN Design [7:54023]
First of all, thank for the wonderful response. So from what you all have said. If the user is for normal purpose like running some application on servers and access the Internet. Will a 100Mbps be sufficient for 300 users. As for the users, they will be splitted into several group of around 15-20 each.Or a 10Mbps switch will be more than sufficient for it. Can i calculate the BW for each user in this manner: 100M / 300 (no of user) Assuming full usage. Let say i have around 3 storey of about 300 users each, The backbone switch should be 10x the BW of each floor rite? Cheers, Jimmy Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=54159t=54023 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: LAN Design [7:54023]
I may be able to provide the network design that the members of groupstudy helped with (they just about designed it) Will be glad to pass it on if you wish. John -Original Message- From: Jimmy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, 26 September 2002 11:22 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: LAN Design [7:54023] First of all, thank for the wonderful response. So from what you all have said. If the user is for normal purpose like running some application on servers and access the Internet. Will a 100Mbps be sufficient for 300 users. As for the users, they will be splitted into several group of around 15-20 each.Or a 10Mbps switch will be more than sufficient for it. Can i calculate the BW for each user in this manner: 100M / 300 (no of user) Assuming full usage. Let say i have around 3 storey of about 300 users each, The backbone switch should be 10x the BW of each floor rite? Cheers, Jimmy ** visit http://www.solution6.com UK Customers - http://www.solution6.co.uk * This email message (and attachments) may contain information that is confidential to Solution 6. If you are not the intended recipient you cannot use, distribute or copy the message or attachments. In such a case, please notify the sender by return email immediately and erase all copies of the message and attachments. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message and attachments that do not relate to the official business of Solution 6 are neither given nor endorsed by it. * Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=54160t=54023 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: LAN Design [7:54023]
Tom Lisa wrote: I'm hurt to say the least. I touch on all of those, albeit briefly. After all, I'm not teaching CCDA/DP courses. Prof. Tom Lisa, CCAI Community College of Southern Nevada Cisco ATC/Regional Networking Academy I'm sure experienced, knowledgable professors such as yourself do teach design in a well-rounded fashion. ;-) It's more the Academy course materials I was concerned about. They teach design from a cabling, hardware, product viewpoint, which does have some value, by the way. As Chuck mentioned, you have to think about the positioning of wiring closets, the MDF, etc. Cisco Networking Academy harps on that a lot, from what I remember. Priscilla Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote: Thank-you very much for the recommendations for Top-Down Network Design. I probably don't express my gratitude often enough to the many people who bought the book. I suspect that we may be helping a Cisco Networking Academy student with homework. ;-) This sounds a lot like the exercises they do. That program has a tendency to teach a bottom-up design methodology that focuses on physcial size and technology/media selection, before gaining an understanding for: business and political concerns budget user expectations for reliability, response time, etc. application requirements for bandwidth, delay, etc. appliation behavior in terms of broadcasts, traffic patterns, etc. You all did a good job of pointing out the importantance of these concepts, so I will say no more. Priscilla Chuck's Long Road wrote: Tim Medley wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... If you are serious about designing this netwoek and designing ir correctly for scalability and functionality, pick up a good network design book. My reccomendation is Top Down Network Design, by Priscilla Openheimer. U have two copies one at home and one at the office, I refer to this tome quite often. Great book, excellent methodology. CL: a good book indeed. the irony here is that oftentimes, particularly in smaller environments, the person who has to make these decisions is under a severe time constraint, and does not have time to attain the background that all of us study. back in the days when I was a network manager, I never had time to learn this stuff. my own road to correct network thinking began after I was downsized. :- Tim Medley, CCNP+Voice, CCDP, CWNA Sr. Network Architect VoIP Group iReadyWorld -Original Message- From: Jimmy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 11:01 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: LAN Design [7:54023] If i have to design network for 3 storey on a building. There are around 200-300 workstations in 2 storey each. Is it advisable to use Ethernet to link them up. As for the other storey it is for admin purpose. The distance is around 150m between the further storey. However it is possible to put a switch/router at the middle for interconnect. Cheers, Jimmy Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=54165t=54023 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: LAN Design [7:54023]
Jimmy wrote: First of all, thank for the wonderful response. So from what you all have said. If the user is for normal purpose like running some application on servers and access the Internet. Will a 100Mbps be sufficient for 300 users. We don't have enough info about the applications or the placement of servers in the topology to give you very valuable suggestions. But, we may be able to make a few generalizations. If I get out on a limb with these generalizations, hopefully somebody will come out after me and correct my mistakes. :-) 100 Mbps is probably sufficient for 300 users using typical desktop applications and browsing typical Web sites. As someone else said, actually 10 Mbps is proably sufficient also. If you are using switches, remember that EACH switch port has 100 (or 10) Mbps, so you may have more bandwidth than you realize. The bottleneck may the switch itself. You will want to research the backplane speed of any switches you are considering. Another bottleneck will be links between switches which aggregate many traffic flows. Also, links to servers often get congested and should have more bandwidth than links to end users. As many people have mentioned, you are on the edge as far as how many devices you have in one switched network. All those devices are in the same broadcast domain. They will all hear and process each other's broadcast traffic. Some protocols and applications, including Windows networking, send a lot of broadcasts. This is especially a problem on slow, older PCs. Cisco recommends you minimize the size of a broadcast domain to a few hundred devices. The exact number depends on the protocols. I think most people limit it even more than Cisco says to, actually. A router does not forward broadcasts. Adding a router or two to the design will solve the broadcast problem. VLANs also limit the size of broadcast domains and could be a good solution. As for the users, they will be splitted into several group of around 15-20 each.Or a 10Mbps switch will be more than sufficient for it. Can i calculate the BW for each user in this manner: 100M / 300 (no of user) Assuming full usage. Which bandwidth? The bandwidth on shared links? What traffic flows through those links? See, we can't give you specific info without more info on the topology you have planned. Let say i have around 3 storey of about 300 users each, 300 users on each floor? OK, so you do need some routers or routing switches in there. Or at least some VLANs to contain the spread of broadcasts. The backbone switch should be 10x the BW of each floor rite? In general, you don't need to provision enough bandwidth for every device to be using all of its theoretical capacity all at the same time. That would be too expensive, for one thing. Also network traffic is bursty and the capacity isn't used all the time. And we need to know where the traffic is flowing. Some traffic may be peer-to-peer and not cross the backbones. Some will go to the servers. Some will go to the Internet, etc. There are no easy answers. I think that has become my new motto. ___ Priscilla Oppenheimer www.troubleshootingnetworks.com www.priscilla.com Cheers, Jimmy Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=54169t=54023 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: LAN Design [7:54023]
No maybe your not, but when we in the real world build networks, cost, politics and budgets come into play as much if not more than the network itself... Larry Letterman Cisco Systems It-Lan Team Tom Lisa wrote: I'm hurt to say the least. I touch on all of those, albeit briefly. After all, I'm not teaching CCDA/DP courses. Prof. Tom Lisa, CCAI Community College of Southern Nevada Cisco ATC/Regional Networking Academy Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote: Thank-you very much for the recommendations for Top-Down Network Design. I probably don't express my gratitude often enough to the many people who bought the book. I suspect that we may be helping a Cisco Networking Academy student with homework. ;-) This sounds a lot like the exercises they do. That program has a tendency to teach a bottom-up design methodology that focuses on physcial size and technology/media selection, before gaining an understanding for: business and political concerns budget user expectations for reliability, response time, etc. application requirements for bandwidth, delay, etc. appliation behavior in terms of broadcasts, traffic patterns, etc. You all did a good job of pointing out the importantance of these concepts, so I will say no more. Priscilla Chuck's Long Road wrote: Tim Medley wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... If you are serious about designing this netwoek and designing ir correctly for scalability and functionality, pick up a good network design book. My reccomendation is Top Down Network Design, by Priscilla Openheimer. U have two copies one at home and one at the office, I refer to this tome quite often. Great book, excellent methodology. CL: a good book indeed. the irony here is that oftentimes, particularly in smaller environments, the person who has to make these decisions is under a severe time constraint, and does not have time to attain the background that all of us study. back in the days when I was a network manager, I never had time to learn this stuff. my own road to correct network thinking began after I was downsized. :- Tim Medley, CCNP+Voice, CCDP, CWNA Sr. Network Architect VoIP Group iReadyWorld -Original Message- From: Jimmy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 11:01 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: LAN Design [7:54023] If i have to design network for 3 storey on a building. There are around 200-300 workstations in 2 storey each. Is it advisable to use Ethernet to link them up. As for the other storey it is for admin purpose. The distance is around 150m between the further storey. However it is possible to put a switch/router at the middle for interconnect. Cheers, Jimmy -- Larry Letterman Network Engineer Cisco Systems Inc. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=54173t=54023 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: LAN Design [7:54023]
Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Jimmy wrote: snip for breveity 300 users on each floor? OK, so you do need some routers or routing switches in there. Or at least some VLANs to contain the spread of broadcasts. The backbone switch should be 10x the BW of each floor rite? In general, you don't need to provision enough bandwidth for every device to be using all of its theoretical capacity all at the same time. That would be too expensive, for one thing. Also network traffic is bursty and the capacity isn't used all the time. And we need to know where the traffic is flowing. Some traffic may be peer-to-peer and not cross the backbones. Some will go to the servers. Some will go to the Internet, etc. There are no easy answers. I think that has become my new motto. CL: Au contraire, mon ami, there are always easy answers. And in these modern times, those easy answers are often good ones. CL: Cisco's easy answer is to put a 6509 on each floor. Maybe using the MSFC2 sup cards and the inline power RJ45 cards in case the client installs AVVID a year or two down the line. Is this a bad solution? No. CL: As an alternative, throw a 3550-12G and a few 3550-48's in each closet. gig links from the 48's to the 12G, and maybe a couple of gig ports in an etherchannel to the main closet. Is this a bad solution? No. In fact, in many ways, this is a better one because the 3550's are wire speed non blocking, while the 6509 is not. Not to mention the significantly lower cost. CL: I am not denegrating good practice, or thoughtful response. But I am suggesting that given the capabilities of current equipment, one can get away with more than was possible in the good old days of hubs. In networking as well as in sports, speed makes up for a lot of other shortcomings. Particularly 100 megabit full duplex to the desktop, and multi-gig ehterchannel uplinks. ___ Priscilla Oppenheimer www.troubleshootingnetworks.com www.priscilla.com Cheers, Jimmy Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=54176t=54023 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: LAN Design [7:54023]
Jimmy, The access switch(users) should not be oversubscribed by more than 3 to 1in my opinion.. the total user bandwidth if you have a 12 port switch at 100 mb per port is 1.2 gb...the switch needs to be able to handle at least 400 mb of thruput also the core switches should be faster than the access switches below it if the core switch is 100mb, then the user access switches should 10 mb switches with a 100mb uplink to the core Jimmy wrote: First of all, thank for the wonderful response. So from what you all have said. If the user is for normal purpose like running some application on servers and access the Internet. Will a 100Mbps be sufficient for 300 users. As for the users, they will be splitted into several group of around 15-20 each.Or a 10Mbps switch will be more than sufficient for it. Can i calculate the BW for each user in this manner: 100M / 300 (no of user) Assuming full usage. Let say i have around 3 storey of about 300 users each, The backbone switch should be 10x the BW of each floor rite? Cheers, Jimmy -- Larry Letterman Network Engineer Cisco Systems Inc. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=54177t=54023 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: LAN Design [7:54023]
Larry Letterman wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Jimmy, The access switch(users) should not be oversubscribed by more than 3 to 1in my opinion.. the total user bandwidth if you have a 12 port switch at 100 mb per port is 1.2 gb...the switch needs to be able to handle at least 400 mb of thruput CL: I'm always curious about numbers. Long evenings in night school taking management courses. So if you don't mind, what is the rationale for this ratio? CL: just looking for a bit more education also the core switches should be faster than the access switches below it if the core switch is 100mb, then the user access switches should 10 mb switches with a 100mb uplink to the core Jimmy wrote: First of all, thank for the wonderful response. So from what you all have said. If the user is for normal purpose like running some application on servers and access the Internet. Will a 100Mbps be sufficient for 300 users. As for the users, they will be splitted into several group of around 15-20 each.Or a 10Mbps switch will be more than sufficient for it. Can i calculate the BW for each user in this manner: 100M / 300 (no of user) Assuming full usage. Let say i have around 3 storey of about 300 users each, The backbone switch should be 10x the BW of each floor rite? Cheers, Jimmy -- Larry Letterman Network Engineer Cisco Systems Inc. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=54181t=54023 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: LAN Design [7:54023]
Chuck, Are you in the US? It mus be deep into the night, though I do not know the time zones there very well (2.15 pm in Japan. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=54183t=54023 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: LAN Design [7:54023]
Yes, Sem1 does concentrate on Layer 1. We teach the concepts from the bottom up. But, as we all know, Top Down Network Design is best. Didn't someone write a book on it? All good design starts by getting Layer 8 issues resolved first. Prof. Tom Lisa, CCAI Community College of Southern Nevada Cisco ATC/Regional Networking Academy Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote: Tom Lisa wrote: I'm hurt to say the least. I touch on all of those, albeit briefly. After all, I'm not teaching CCDA/DP courses. Prof. Tom Lisa, CCAI Community College of Southern Nevada Cisco ATC/Regional Networking Academy I'm sure experienced, knowledgable professors such as yourself do teach design in a well-rounded fashion. ;-) It's more the Academy course materials I was concerned about. They teach design from a cabling, hardware, product viewpoint, which does have some value, by the way. As Chuck mentioned, you have to think about the positioning of wiring closets, the MDF, etc. Cisco Networking Academy harps on that a lot, from what I remember. Priscilla Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote: Thank-you very much for the recommendations for Top-Down Network Design. I probably don't express my gratitude often enough to the many people who bought the book. I suspect that we may be helping a Cisco Networking Academy student with homework. ;-) This sounds a lot like the exercises they do. That program has a tendency to teach a bottom-up design methodology that focuses on physcial size and technology/media selection, before gaining an understanding for: business and political concerns budget user expectations for reliability, response time, etc. application requirements for bandwidth, delay, etc. appliation behavior in terms of broadcasts, traffic patterns, etc. You all did a good job of pointing out the importantance of these concepts, so I will say no more. Priscilla Chuck's Long Road wrote: Tim Medley wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... If you are serious about designing this netwoek and designing ir correctly for scalability and functionality, pick up a good network design book. My reccomendation is Top Down Network Design, by Priscilla Openheimer. U have two copies one at home and one at the office, I refer to this tome quite often. Great book, excellent methodology. CL: a good book indeed. the irony here is that oftentimes, particularly in smaller environments, the person who has to make these decisions is under a severe time constraint, and does not have time to attain the background that all of us study. back in the days when I was a network manager, I never had time to learn this stuff. my own road to correct network thinking began after I was downsized. :- Tim Medley, CCNP+Voice, CCDP, CWNA Sr. Network Architect VoIP Group iReadyWorld -Original Message- From: Jimmy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 11:01 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: LAN Design [7:54023] If i have to design network for 3 storey on a building. There are around 200-300 workstations in 2 storey each. Is it advisable to use Ethernet to link them up. As for the other storey it is for admin purpose. The distance is around 150m between the further storey. However it is possible to put a switch/router at the middle for interconnect. Cheers, Jimmy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=54186t=54023 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
LAN Design [7:54023]
If i have to design network for 3 storey on a building. There are around 200-300 workstations in 2 storey each. Is it advisable to use Ethernet to link them up. As for the other storey it is for admin purpose. The distance is around 150m between the further storey. However it is possible to put a switch/router at the middle for interconnect. Cheers, Jimmy Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=54023t=54023 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: LAN Design [7:54023]
If you are serious about designing this netwoek and designing ir correctly for scalability and functionality, pick up a good network design book. My reccomendation is Top Down Network Design, by Priscilla Openheimer. U have two copies one at home and one at the office, I refer to this tome quite often. Great book, excellent methodology. Tim Medley, CCNP+Voice, CCDP, CWNA Sr. Network Architect VoIP Group iReadyWorld -Original Message- From: Jimmy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 11:01 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: LAN Design [7:54023] If i have to design network for 3 storey on a building. There are around 200-300 workstations in 2 storey each. Is it advisable to use Ethernet to link them up. As for the other storey it is for admin purpose. The distance is around 150m between the further storey. However it is possible to put a switch/router at the middle for interconnect. Cheers, Jimmy Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=54029t=54023 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Help with LAN design/routing [7:21508]
Trying to figure the following routing issue out with the following: http://cisco-skin.tripod.com/Network.htm Thanks in advance. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=21508t=21508 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Help with LAN design/routing [7:21508]
Can you give any more information regarding the static ARP's/CAM's applied Jeff? Cheers, Gareth Jeff Duchin wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Trying to figure the following routing issue out with the following: http://cisco-skin.tripod.com/Network.htm Thanks in advance. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=21512t=21508 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Help with LAN design/routing [7:21508]
MSFC1s, or MSFC2s? What version of code? I know there are multiple issues with in-chassis redundancy with MSFC2s and HSRP... -Original Message- From: Jeff Duchin To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2001 12:35:38 -0400 Subject: Help with LAN design/routing [7:21508] Trying to figure the following routing issue out with the following: http://cisco-skin.tripod.com/Network.htm Thanks in advance. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=21514t=21508 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Help with LAN design/routing [7:21508]
Switch A has SUP2/MSFC2 running 12.1(7)E and Switch B has SUPq/MSFC1 also with 12.1(7)E. Both are configured for Redundancy/H.A./Configsync. Any ideas? The static arp entry is on each MSFC stating the MAC/IP address of the virtual ip address of the firewall's (as StoneBeat uses this much the same way HSRP is used). The Staic CAM entries are there so that no other hosts have to process the multicast packets that the firewalls listen to and need to talk to each other. Jeff Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=21517t=21508 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Help with LAN design/routing [7:21508]
I did find this on StoneBeats website: You have to define also static ARP entries for the directly connected Cisco routers if you are not using dedicated IP addresses. http://www.stonesoft.com/document/art/329.html Jeff Duchin wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Trying to figure the following routing issue out with the following: http://cisco-skin.tripod.com/Network.htm Thanks in advance. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=21520t=21508 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Help with LAN design/routing [7:21508]
Try adding a cam entry not only for the actual ports the firewalls plug into, but also include the trunk ports in the cam entry. Clayton Price Jeff Duchin wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... I did find this on StoneBeats website: You have to define also static ARP entries for the directly connected Cisco routers if you are not using dedicated IP addresses. http://www.stonesoft.com/document/art/329.html Jeff Duchin wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Trying to figure the following routing issue out with the following: http://cisco-skin.tripod.com/Network.htm Thanks in advance. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=21539t=21508 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: LAN design
And depending on the network topology you can even skip a few layer 2 hops and 1 layer 3 hop when compare to traditional routing. Tony Olzak wrote: But the performance is still much faster than manually routing = everything. After the first couple of packets, the switch doesn't need to go = through the router to reach the other subnet. So, in fact, it is really like layer = 3 switching. "Kent Hundley" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message = news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]= p.m icrosoft.com... Ron, layer 3 switching =3D routing "layer 3 switching" is just a marketing term thought up by sales = droids to confuse the masses. At most, layer 3 switching means "fast routing = and fowarding". You have asics and software enhancements, but the basic foundation its still a layer 3 path determination and forwarding = based on that information, i.e what we called routing in the old days. Hope that sheds some light. -Kent -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf = Of Ron Stark Sent: Friday, July 21, 2000 10:06 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: LAN design Hi people, I have a design question that I was wondering if someone could shed = some light on. With all the talk of layer3 switching these days, is it a good = idea to switch at the core? Shouldn't the core be routed? Thanks - Ron ___ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: = http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to = [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: = http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to = [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- ___ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: LAN design
I think ONE of the main purposes of the term 'layer 3 switching' was to show off multiple VLAN routing within the high-end Cisco switch. This is a really cool technology within a switch and is definately beneficial when running several VLANs on one or more switches...No external routers to route between VLANs needed. What a deal!! Marc ""Ian Schorr"" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message 8lr67m$mgp$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:8lr67m$mgp$[EMAIL PROTECTED]... And by default, most current Cisco routers already have Fast Switching or better enabled (unless extended IP access lists are applied, if I remember right). ""Tony Olzak"" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message 8lak03$u0r$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:8lak03$u0r$[EMAIL PROTECTED]... But the performance is still much faster than manually routing everything. After the first couple of packets, the switch doesn't need to go through the router to reach the other subnet. So, in fact, it is really like layer 3 switching. "Kent Hundley" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] icrosoft.com... Ron, layer 3 switching = routing "layer 3 switching" is just a marketing term thought up by sales droids to confuse the masses. At most, layer 3 switching means "fast routing and fowarding". You have asics and software enhancements, but the basic foundation its still a layer 3 path determination and forwarding based on that information, i.e what we called routing in the old days. Hope that sheds some light. -Kent -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ron Stark Sent: Friday, July 21, 2000 10:06 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: LAN design Hi people, I have a design question that I was wondering if someone could shed some light on. With all the talk of layer3 switching these days, is it a good idea to switch at the core? Shouldn't the core be routed? Thanks - Ron ___ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- ___ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: LAN design
And by default, most current Cisco routers already have Fast Switching or better enabled (unless extended IP access lists are applied, if I remember right). I think this is an outdated statement, although I do not know what IOS release(s) changed this thought. On a 2500 running 12.1(2) IP: Serial0 is up, line protocol is up Outgoing access list is not set Inbound access list is 101 IP fast switching is enabled IP fast switching on the same interface is enabled IP Flow switching is disabled IP CEF switching is enabled IP CEF Feature Fast switching turbo vector Just to be sure, I disabled CEF and IP fast switching stuck, so it's not a purely CEF feature. Anyone know a good document outlining when changes like this took place? ___ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: LAN design
And by default, most current Cisco routers already have Fast Switching or better enabled (unless extended IP access lists are applied, if I remember right). ""Tony Olzak"" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message 8lak03$u0r$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:8lak03$u0r$[EMAIL PROTECTED]... But the performance is still much faster than manually routing everything. After the first couple of packets, the switch doesn't need to go through the router to reach the other subnet. So, in fact, it is really like layer 3 switching. "Kent Hundley" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] icrosoft.com... Ron, layer 3 switching = routing "layer 3 switching" is just a marketing term thought up by sales droids to confuse the masses. At most, layer 3 switching means "fast routing and fowarding". You have asics and software enhancements, but the basic foundation its still a layer 3 path determination and forwarding based on that information, i.e what we called routing in the old days. Hope that sheds some light. -Kent -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ron Stark Sent: Friday, July 21, 2000 10:06 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: LAN design Hi people, I have a design question that I was wondering if someone could shed some light on. With all the talk of layer3 switching these days, is it a good idea to switch at the core? Shouldn't the core be routed? Thanks - Ron ___ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: LAN design
Ron, layer 3 switching = routing "layer 3 switching" is just a marketing term thought up by sales droids to confuse the masses. At most, layer 3 switching means "fast routing and fowarding". You have asics and software enhancements, but the basic foundation its still a layer 3 path determination and forwarding based on that information, i.e what we called routing in the old days. Hope that sheds some light. -Kent -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ron Stark Sent: Friday, July 21, 2000 10:06 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: LAN design Hi people, I have a design question that I was wondering if someone could shed some light on. With all the talk of layer3 switching these days, is it a good idea to switch at the core? Shouldn't the core be routed? Thanks - Ron ___ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: LAN design
All things taken into consideration a core in many cases will be better served at layer 2, with routing taking place at the edges of the core at the access and distribution layers. This moves the path selection processing to the edges and leaves the core as a layer 2 transit area normally with large pipes between the distribution and access layers of your design. Layer 3 switching may change this to some degree. Scott Ron Stark wrote: Hi people, I have a design question that I was wondering if someone could shed some light on. With all the talk of layer3 switching these days, is it a good idea to switch at the core? Shouldn't the core be routed? Thanks - Ron ___ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: LAN design
Howard, Kent thanks your insight it does help. What I hear you saying Kent is that Layer3 switching is still Layer2 with a Layer3 module off the fabric (which is not all bad). As long as we can to path determination that could work, as stated below broadcasts are an issue. Howard, first off just I wanted to say that I enjoyed your articles on the certificationzone, they help allot with my CCNA. I don't think I trying to solve a problem per say, the company is/was a 3com house and now we're looking at fork lifting 3com equipment in favor of Cisco. With that in mind some redesigning is in order, we're one big flat network/collision domain using DHCP in a LAN/MAN quasi campus configuration. My boss the network manager is eager to change this but is big on switching, everything is switched (once you get past the disychained hubs...) except our FR and Internet connections. Add some legacy IPX devices with SAP advertisments...talk about broadcast hell..sheeesh! Anyway I've been working on CCNP and I thought this could be a small intro into design and I didn't want to "pound the table" on position without knowing what ideas were out there. Thanks for your insight - Ron "Ron Stark" [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 07/21/2000 10:05:56 AM Please respond to "Ron Stark" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc:(bcc: Ron Stark/SanDiego/Cymer) Subject: LAN design Hi people, I have a design question that I was wondering if someone could shed some light on. With all the talk of layer3 switching these days, is it a good idea to switch at the core? Shouldn't the core be routed? Thanks - Ron ___ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: LAN design
And depending on the network topology you can even skip a few layer 2 hops and 1 layer 3 hop when compare to traditional routing. Tony Olzak wrote: But the performance is still much faster than manually routing everything. After the first couple of packets, the switch doesn't need to go through the router to reach the other subnet. So, in fact, it is really like layer 3 switching. "Kent Hundley" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] icrosoft.com... Ron, layer 3 switching = routing "layer 3 switching" is just a marketing term thought up by sales droids to confuse the masses. At most, layer 3 switching means "fast routing and fowarding". You have asics and software enhancements, but the basic foundation its still a layer 3 path determination and forwarding based on that information, i.e what we called routing in the old days. Hope that sheds some light. -Kent -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ron Stark Sent: Friday, July 21, 2000 10:06 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: LAN design Hi people, I have a design question that I was wondering if someone could shed some light on. With all the talk of layer3 switching these days, is it a good idea to switch at the core? Shouldn't the core be routed? Thanks - Ron ___ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- ___ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] begin:vcard n:Wollman;William x-mozilla-html:FALSE adr:;; version:2.1 email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] fn:William V. Wollman end:vcard
RE: LAN design
Like I said, "fast routing". None of this takes away from the fact that some device has to perform a layer 3 path determination and a forwarding decision. Vendors can play games with where this information is sent and how other devices can take advantage of that information to forward packets without having "true" layer 3 capability themselves, but the bottom line is that there is still a layer 3 device that is the brains behind the operation. You can call it a router or you can call it a layer 3 switch but its still fundamentally the same. My point is that there is not a fundamental difference between what vendors like to call "layer 3 switching" and routing, its all the same principles, just applied a little differently. It's the same as comparing a layer 2 switch and a bridge. A layer 2 switch is fundamentally just a multi-port bridge with asics and port buffers. Sure, there are a lot of features that switches have that bridges don't, but that doesn't take away from the fact that they are built and function on the same basic concepts. Networking is built on simple concepts, there's no reason to make it seem more complicated than it is. Vendors like to come up with new terms for the same technologies that have existed for years to make something seem new and different when its just an evolutionary change, not revolutionary. -Kent -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of William V. Wollman Sent: Friday, July 21, 2000 4:15 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: LAN design And depending on the network topology you can even skip a few layer 2 hops and 1 layer 3 hop when compare to traditional routing. Tony Olzak wrote: But the performance is still much faster than manually routing everything. After the first couple of packets, the switch doesn't need to go through the router to reach the other subnet. So, in fact, it is really like layer 3 switching. "Kent Hundley" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] icrosoft.com... Ron, layer 3 switching = routing "layer 3 switching" is just a marketing term thought up by sales droids to confuse the masses. At most, layer 3 switching means "fast routing and fowarding". You have asics and software enhancements, but the basic foundation its still a layer 3 path determination and forwarding based on that information, i.e what we called routing in the old days. Hope that sheds some light. -Kent -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ron Stark Sent: Friday, July 21, 2000 10:06 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: LAN design Hi people, I have a design question that I was wondering if someone could shed some light on. With all the talk of layer3 switching these days, is it a good idea to switch at the core? Shouldn't the core be routed? Thanks - Ron ___ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- ___ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
