Cabal
Premium
join:2007-01-21
Boston, MA
| reply to A900MHz Fan
Re: Routing between the same subnet
said by A900MHz Fan  :Every port on the RVON switch (that is connected) is constantly flashing in time with the group. That's not a very good indication of capacity.
But you could easily do what you want to do with a system/router configured as a bridge, or use two subnets (simpler).
--
Interested in open source engine management for your Subaru? |
|
A900MHz Fan
join:2004-07-12
Mitchell, SD
| said by Cabal :said by A900MHz Fan :Every port on the RVON switch (that is connected) is constantly flashing in time with the group. That's not a very good indication of capacity. But you could easily do what you want to do with a system/router configured as a bridge, or use two subnets (simpler). Would a bridge not forward all broadcast from the RVON though? Using two subnets is not an option.
Neal |
|
elnino
join:2006-08-27
Akron, OH
2 edits | said by A900MHz Fan :Would a bridge not forward all broadcast from the RVON though? Using two subnets is not an option. No, a bridge/switch would forward broadcast traffic to everyone on that subnet. The only way to create a new broadcast domain is to install a router and make a new subnet. Switches separate collision domains; routers separate broadcast domains.
Have you sniffed the traffic to see that it is broadcast traffic? Do you realize you're also using non-RFC1918 IP addresses for your internal network? |
|
A900MHz Fan
join:2004-07-12
Mitchell, SD
| said by elnino :said by A900MHz Fan :Would a bridge not forward all broadcast from the RVON though? Using two subnets is not an option. No, a bridge/switch would forward broadcast traffic to everyone on that subnet. The only way to create a new broadcast domain is to install a router and make a new subnet. Switches separate collision domains; routers separate broadcast domains. Have you sniffed the traffic to see that it is broadcast traffic? Do you realize you're also using non-RFC1918 IP addresses for your internal network? The 192.170.1.xxx was chosen as more than 50% of the gear came with that block OEM.
So are you saying there is no same subnet routing solution?
Neal |
|
tschmidt
Premium,MVM
join:2000-11-12
Milford, NH
 ·Hollis Hosting
 ·Verizon Online DSL
·Fairpoint Communic..
| said by A900MHz Fan : So are you saying there is no same subnet routing solution? Correct - that is the definition of routing. When a host wants to send a packet to another host not on the same subnet it forwards it to router (also called gateway). It is the router's responsibility to figure out how to deliver the packet or at least advance it along the route to the ultimate destination.
Since you are concerned about "chatty" traffic have you though about using a single large switch? Switch back-plane is much faster then individual ports so it is able to handle a lot of traffic.
Have you done the test elnino recommended? You may find out this is much to do about nothing. Even though RVON devices constantly send packets the amount of capacity they use is minimal.
/tom |
|
A900MHz Fan
join:2004-07-12
Mitchell, SD | Single switch would be nice but I must use existing infrastructure. I will have to just live with the slowdown, which really seems to only manifest in the Linksys router.
I appreciate the responses guys!
Neal |
|
Cabal
Premium
join:2007-01-21
Boston, MA
| reply to A900MHz Fan
said by A900MHz Fan :said by elnino :said by A900MHz Fan :Would a bridge not forward all broadcast from the RVON though? Using two subnets is not an option. No, a bridge/switch would forward broadcast traffic to everyone on that subnet. The only way to create a new broadcast domain is to install a router and make a new subnet. Switches separate collision domains; routers separate broadcast domains. Have you sniffed the traffic to see that it is broadcast traffic? Do you realize you're also using non-RFC1918 IP addresses for your internal network? The 192.170.1.xxx was chosen as more than 50% of the gear came with that block OEM. So are you saying there is no same subnet routing solution? Neal There's nothing to stop you from filtering on the bridge. It works well for devices that have a need for same-subnet access but can't be filtered on the host (but there are plenty of other ways of doing so). A dumb bridge wouldn't gain you anything, of course.
--
Interested in open source engine management for your Subaru? |
|
A900MHz Fan
join:2004-07-12
Mitchell, SD
| said by Cabal :There's nothing to stop you from filtering on the bridge. It works well for devices that have a need for same-subnet access but can't be filtered on the host (but there are plenty of other ways of doing so). A dumb bridge wouldn't gain you anything, of course. I have never attempted such a thing, where can I get more information and equipment to do this?
Neal |
|
bbarrera
Premium,MVM
join:2000-10-23
Sacramento, CA
clubs:
·SureWest Internet
| reply to A900MHz Fan
said by A900MHz Fan :I will have to just live with the slowdown, which really seems to only manifest in the Linksys router. Can you explain that a bit more? Does the RVON gear talk to RVON gear in another office? |
|
A900MHz Fan
join:2004-07-12
Mitchell, SD | Yes, there is a group of RVON gear spread out at different locations via wireless, fiber and standard Cat5e links. There is other equipment that is on the same switch(es) as the RVON.
Neal |
|
tschmidt
Premium,MVM
join:2000-11-12
Milford, NH
·Hollis Hosting
·Verizon Online DSL
·Fairpoint Communic..
| said by A900MHz Fan : There is other equipment that is on the same switch(es) as the RVON. Do your switches support trunking or plug in high speed ports? That way you can upgrade the link between switches.
/tom |
|
elnino
join:2006-08-27
Akron, OH
| said by tschmidt :said by A900MHz Fan : There is other equipment that is on the same switch(es) as the RVON. Do your switches support trunking or plug in high speed ports? That way you can upgrade the link between switches. /tom Each switch has 2 gigabit ports on them, that should be plenty of uplink speed even when they aren't bonded.
I'm still not sure why you can't keep the existing subnet for the RVON stuff and then make a new subnet for everything else. If the network is designed as the picture above (with the Internet switch as a different subnet), there's no reason I can see why it wouldn't work. If there needs to be broadcast traffic from the internet subnet to the RVON side, then you can't separate them. As long as the second router has NAT disabled, every device can be accessed as if they were on the same subnet.
I couldn't find any info online about RVON devices so I'm not sure how that protocol or whatever actually work |
|
billaustin
Bill
Premium,MVM
join:2001-10-13
North Las Vegas, NV
| reply to A900MHz Fan
said by A900MHz Fan :Single switch would be nice but I must use existing infrastructure. I will have to just live with the slowdown, which really seems to only manifest in the Linksys router. I appreciate the responses guys! Neal If the slowdown is in the router, that's what you should look at replacing. I would suggest a router with a little more horsepower. I run Mikrotik on an older PC and use multiple AP's for wireless coverage. The Netopia 3386-ENT is also a decent little unit. |
|
bbarrera
Premium,MVM
join:2000-10-23
Sacramento, CA
clubs:
·SureWest Internet
| reply to A900MHz Fan
said by A900MHz Fan :Yes, there is a group of RVON gear spread out at different locations via wireless, fiber and standard Cat5e links. There is other equipment that is on the same switch(es) as the RVON. I suspect you have a lot of VoIP traffic from LAN to Internet and that is reason for 'slowdown' -- it would really help if you explained what you meant by slowdown. If you have significant VoIP traffic to/from the Internet then you either need more bandwidth or a better router. |
|
