Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 17
  1. #1
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    119

    Subnetting? Would this be accurate...?

    Hello,


    My current setup, question, and concern is this...

    My current office network is using a single static IP address, and all PC devices on it are working under the same Workgroup. We recently installed a faster broadband connection with another static IP address as well and have it being utilized on a new server that has two NIC's installed. This new server will be replacing the old one, on the old broadband connection. We do not want to remove the old connection, but we do want to remove the old server. On the old connection there is 30+ office PC's not currently setup on a domain service.

    So... The main question is this... If I take a cat5e cable and plug it into the 2nd NIC on the new server, and then plug the other end into our switch supporting the 30+ office PC's, is that subnetting? Given the fact that both ISP connections have static IP's and both are using the same subnet mask, how do I get around that?

    Or... am I talking about something completely different? If so, please correct me and kindly point me in the right direction.


    Thank you.

  2. #2
    Joined
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    1,180

    Re: Subnetting? Would this be accurate...?

    Subnetting.

    Simply .. whenever you add a device between computers to control communication you are generally subnetting.

    Forgive me if im wrong here but im a bit confused by your old setup:

    30 comps>>>>>Network Switch>>>TO OLD BROADBAND?

    is that how its currently setup?

    A switch is mainly used (or at least I thought it was) when you want to connect legacy devices onto the same network and communicate .. like 10/00 network cards to 10/100/1000 and Fibre optics and that nice old token ring stuff.

    Your suggestion does not lead your OLD 30 computers to your OLD network connection, you are simply running it to your server so your 30 pcs have access to the server.

    Where in your suggestion does your OLD NETWORK connect? Into the OLD switch?

    I would think a router would be more effecient and faster.. but I could be wrong...but I think im mostly right.

  3. #3
    Joined
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Broken Arrow, OK
    Age
    30
    Posts
    1,927

    Re: Subnetting? Would this be accurate...?

    Your post confused me.

    It's possible to hook both connections up to the new server and enable load balancing so it uses both connections depending on which one is less burdened, but I'm not seeing your network in my head clearly.

    Do a quick diagram of what your network is and what you're wanting to do, even in MS paint, if you would. It'd help me out as I'm confused.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subnetting <--For the larger version of what Yeah said.
    My heatware

    Proudly NOT a console or subscription/micropayment gamer.

  4. #4
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    119

    Re: Subnetting? Would this be accurate...?

    I made this diagram to kind of explain the setup better. Don't bash me for my two minute MS Paint skills lol... Modem 1 has a single static IP address coming into it. It then goes to a router obviously, which then splits off the connection to the switch we have supporting all the 30+ devices connected to it. Modem 2 has 5 static IP addresses which is why the switch is first, then the router hooking up to the server. The server has two NIC's. I want to attach the server to the switch containing the 30+ office PC's so the office PC's can see the new server, which has an enabled shared drive. Do I use the second NIC on the server or router 2 and plug it into switch 1? Is that at all clearer?


  5. #5
    Joined
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Broken Arrow, OK
    Age
    30
    Posts
    1,927

    Re: Subnetting? Would this be accurate...?

    Two switch 2s there, but yes this should work for the new server. You will need to brush up on multihoming: http://www.google.com/search?q=multi...ient=firefox-a ( I haven't done it in so long I just remember what it is ) but as long as new server is behind switch 2 in the same segment of the network as the 30+ PC devices it should be able to see them.

    I'd seriously consider trying to make that network more linear if it's at all possible. You could hook modem 1 & 2 up to the server, have the server do NAT, hook the server's NAT side up to a switch and then have the 30 PCs hooked up. Then all network traffic could be balanced between the two modems by the server...but this is easier said than done.

    Though this would be a pain to accomplish, it's almost certainly what you'll have to grow to if you add many more PCs. You might experiment with making a primary domain controller soon.
    My heatware

    Proudly NOT a console or subscription/micropayment gamer.

  6. #6
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    119

    Re: Subnetting? Would this be accurate...?

    It's somewhat of a patch fix for the time being. The old connection, modem 1, is a cable internet connection. The new connection, modem 2, is FIOS running straight off of a demarc. A few PC's are still running off of Windows 98 sadly and are not compatible with the new connection. The office PC's still need to access the shared drive when moving from the old to the new server, and just trying to make it as seamless as possible. So it's not as simple as making the new connection the main and only connection through the network. We need the 20/20 connection for data being uploaded to the new server, which is why it's not setup on the old cable connection.
    Last edited by Tulvinous; 05-13-2010 at 08:57 PM.

  7. #7
    Joined
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    554

    Re: Subnetting? Would this be accurate...?

    I'm still having trouble reasoning placing the switch before the router idea on the new modem2 side
    Is it just one ethernet connection into switch and one connection out?

    main reason being
    the router would have a built in firewall when placed in front of the switch
    and having 5 static ip vs just one shouldn't matter ...can you explain?
    Last edited by MrBlack; 05-13-2010 at 11:13 PM.

  8. #8
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    119

    Re: Subnetting? Would this be accurate...?

    MrBlack,

    The reason why you need a switch before the router on connection side #2 is, in order to gain access to each static IP from the demarc, it needs to be split up since there is only one 10/100 RJ45 port. The switch enables the connection to be split up, and in the router is where you asign a static IP, subnet mask, pri/sec dns to differentiate each one.

    I'm not trying to share the internet connections, I'm just trying to get the pc device seen accross the same workgroup while being supported by the other internet connection.

  9. #9
    Joined
    Dec 2000
    Posts
    5,051

    Re: Subnetting? Would this be accurate...?

    If I take a cat5e cable and plug it into the 2nd NIC on the new server, and then plug the other end into our switch supporting the 30+ office PC's, is that subnetting?
    No, that isn't subnetting. Subnetting is done at the ip level not the physical one. ( Which is segmenting which is also not whats being done here.)

    Modem 2 has 5 static IP addresses which is why the switch is first,
    A switch doesn't really do much here, its all about the router being able to handle more then a single ip address on the same wan side interface.

    Otherwise the modem is acting as a router instead.

    If the router is able to handle multiple ips on the same interface you'd connect both modems to a switch then to the router.

    From the router you'd connect a switch then everything else to it.

    Really need to know how the modems and routers are configured, and if the switches are unmanaged, managed, smart, layer 2 or layer 3 models.

  10. #10
    Joined
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    1,180

    Re: Subnetting? Would this be accurate...?

    Any way we could just delete that drunk sounding wrong post of mine up above there? I just hate it when people put out mis-information <<<<<

  11. #11
    Joined
    Dec 2000
    Posts
    5,051

    Re: Subnetting? Would this be accurate...?

    Well, the last half wasn't that bad Yeah and you can edit your post.

  12. #12
    Joined
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Hamilton, On, Can
    Age
    37
    Posts
    827

    Re: Subnetting? Would this be accurate...?

    wouldnt it be much simpler to just set up the new server with DNS, DHCP, Load Balancing, and File Sharing roles, no active domain services needed, and turn that into your primary right off the bat. Then just reconfigure the old server to be a mirror for the redundancy and load balancing... you could then get rid of those routers. Primary gateway new server with IP A, and Secondary as old server with IP B. You would no longer have to worry about the workstations being able to use which connection as all the traffic is going through the servers anyways. and there is compatability available all the way back to windows 2000 server features when installing the server roles. so there shouldnt be a problem with your windows 98 machines.

    Dont mind the flow arrows,
    its just to reference point to point connection
    not flow of data or anything
    Last edited by JSLEnterprises; 05-21-2010 at 08:06 PM.
    ..::J.S.L::..


    Email: jsl@jslenterprises.net

  13. #13
    Joined
    Dec 2000
    Posts
    5,051

    Re: Subnetting? Would this be accurate...?

    It sounds like there is already a load balancing device in the network at either modem 2 or router 2 as the new leg has 5 static ips.

  14. #14
    Joined
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Hamilton, On, Can
    Age
    37
    Posts
    827

    Re: Subnetting? Would this be accurate...?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bryan View Post
    It sounds like there is already a load balancing device in the network at either modem 2 or router 2 as the new leg has 5 static ips.
    not the same tier of load ballancing im talking about though.
    ..::J.S.L::..


    Email: jsl@jslenterprises.net

  15. #15
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    119

    Re: Subnetting? Would this be accurate...?

    The Verizon FIOS demarc is not a router(at least from what I can tell, no connection issues have presented them self to show double NAT). The cable modem can act as a router, but it's currently in bridge mode at the moment.

    The router going into the new server is a Cisco RVS4000, which from what I'm reading doesn't support dual/multi-wan if that's what you're asking. But that is an interesting concept Bryan, where the 98 machines would still work through the cable connection.

    We're pretty set I think on not needing a mirror of the server for backup(RAID 6), unless to lower network traffic which shouldn't be an issue yet.

    I think the question has somewhat gone left field in terms of the available internet connections. We're not keeping the cable connection, we don't want it for any type of redundancy or load balancing. No future plans or maps should include it.

    Multihoming sounds as if I'm trying to boost the connection speed, or for redundancy if one connection drops out.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •