Timeline for Network Layout and Design
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
17 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 6, 2021 at 0:15 | comment | added | Ron Maupin♦ | Did any answer help you? if so, you should accept the answer so that the question doesn't keep popping up forever, looking for an answer. Alternatively, you could post and accept your own answer. | |
| Mar 27, 2015 at 19:18 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackNetworkEng/status/581535784546750464 | ||
| Mar 27, 2015 at 18:53 | comment | added | Matt Fogleman | You're right, my mistake, the server VLAN shouldn't be on there. The WiFi LAN yes because eventually they want WiFi at that building. | |
| Mar 27, 2015 at 16:45 | comment | added | Todd Wilcox | Here's what I'm confused about with the updated diagram: the VLANs available on different switches don't seem to match the nodes on those switches. For example, KENFARMSW1 has 2 phones and 2 PCs on it, but also has the server VLAN available on it? I'm assuming it has the WiFi VLAN because there might be an access point hanging on that switch? | |
| Mar 27, 2015 at 15:48 | comment | added | Matt Fogleman | I added a modified network diagram with user and device counts, updated the core switch to 3560X, and changed VLAN 1 to VLAN 5. Would this be better, now that there is a better idea of user and device counts? | |
| Mar 27, 2015 at 15:45 | history | edited | Matt Fogleman | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Added modified network diagram with more information
|
| Mar 26, 2015 at 23:00 | comment | added | Ron Maupin♦ | Use a router, or a firewall/router combination, for the routing and queuing, and leave the switch in place for a distribution switch. A router probably won't have the necessary port density for all the access switches and other devices you are connecting to the distribution. | |
| Mar 26, 2015 at 22:41 | answer | added | Todd Wilcox | timeline score: 2 | |
| Mar 26, 2015 at 22:40 | comment | added | Matt Fogleman | So should I replace that 3750 with like a 2960S, and then get some sort of router and stick it between the 2960S and the firewall to handle the routing? Something like a 1921 router maybe? | |
| Mar 26, 2015 at 20:41 | comment | added | Ron Maupin♦ | If you are concerned about performance above all, you need a comprehensive QoS policy which requires much router CPU utilization. You may find the switch CPU inadequate with all the processes with which you are burdening it. Even a small router is a better choice for the routing and QoS processing. Mark on the access switch, and queue on the router. | |
| Mar 26, 2015 at 20:32 | comment | added | Matt Fogleman | I was going to use the 3750G, why is that no good? | |
| Mar 26, 2015 at 20:24 | comment | added | Ron Maupin♦ | Where are you routing between the VLANs? The 3750G is a poor choice for that. | |
| Mar 26, 2015 at 20:23 | comment | added | Ron Maupin♦ | You could channel ports. Quick math shows KENHRSW1 could channel three or four 1 Gb ports up to the distribution switch to cover all the ports on and downstream from it (67.2 Gb / 20 = 3.36 Gb), and the same on KENPCKSW1 (62.4 Gb / 20 = 3.12 Gb). | |
| Mar 26, 2015 at 20:00 | comment | added | Matt Fogleman | So best would be to have 10GB links from KENPCKSW1 to KENDCSW1 and from KENHRSW1 to KENDCSW1? The other 10/100 switches will have less than 15 users on them | |
| Mar 26, 2015 at 19:58 | answer | added | user4565 | timeline score: 4 | |
| Mar 26, 2015 at 19:50 | comment | added | Ron Maupin♦ | Be sure to come up with a good QoS plan, else you will find your VoIP messing up. Cisco recommends a 20:1 access to distribution ratio. That means for every 20 1 Gb access ports, you need 1 Gb in your uplink to the distribution. This drawing doesn't seem show that since your uplinks seem to be only 1 Gb. | |
| Mar 26, 2015 at 19:24 | history | asked | Matt Fogleman | CC BY-SA 3.0 |