shamanfk
join:2001-03-12
Fort Kent, ME
| reply to kewlkeed
Re: Network Layout. Need PRO HELP!
the choice between a PC or WRAP/Routerboard is your preference,, either one will do what you want well,, as you will be using a RADIUS server.
If the PC based MT goes down due to hardware failure, you can bring it back up within minutes, if you have the parts/technical skills available locally. There will be no need to reconfigure the MT unless it's a hard drive issue.
If you have hardware failure with a WRAP board , you will need a spare on hand or wait a few days for replacement and will need to reconfigure.
We are a PC shop so opt to use PC based, I have worked with both and see no difference for what you are using them for.
--
Success is getting what you want; Happiness is wanting what you get. |
|
kewlkeed
Grouch
Premium
join:2005-02-05
Knowlton, QC
1 edit | reply to shamanfk
Ahhh kick butt!
Duh yeah now I'm thinking, it MUST be late if I'm forgetting routable IP.
Yeah I'm probably gonna use the 10.x.x.x Scheme. I totally prefer that one but I might just hop the 172.16.x.x as well. Might keep that for core stuff and then jump down to 10 on the CPEs/APs.
Now that I'm thinking somewhat clearly I have some ideas of how to get the MTs to work. God dunno how I never though of that in the first place. Thanks.
Here's another question though for the MTs... What would work best in this situation, have them on two computers or two PC boards (Like RouterBoards or whatever it is they recommend) I want to have all the authenication go through a secondary RADIUS server if that's possible as well. (So no worries about needing massive space on the MT boards for the user info)
Anyone else have any other suggestions for the network layout or anything like that? A bunch of heads is always better than one. |
|
shamanfk
join:2001-03-12
Fort Kent, ME
| reply to kewlkeed
routable IP= Public IP
that way you could communicate with the MT's from anywhere on the internet.
I prefer to have each POP have it's own IP Class, but that could be argued.
I would stay away from the 192.168.x.y class C as many consumer routers use that, and all that you need is for someone to switch the WAN wire with a LAN wire running DHCP.
If you use the Class A ,10.0.x.y pick an unusual combination, as some routers especially aDSL are programmed within that class.
I prefer to use a less know 172.16.x.y class B for a private network configuration.
--
Success is getting what you want; Happiness is wanting what you get. |
|
John Galt
Forward, March
Premium
join:2004-09-30
Happy Camp
 ·CenturyLink
| reply to kewlkeed
said by kewlkeed  :Sorry again cuz I know that's a totally stupid question but again never done this. If you have the guts to ask...I guess that we will just have to answer.
Well, someone else will have to answer 'cuz I am just as stooopid...! 
We will all learn something!
That is the great thing about the forum here...everyone is an expert in some aspect of all this, and by coming here and asking questions, and sharing our knowledge, we all benefit.
--
A is A |
|
kewlkeed
Grouch
Premium
join:2005-02-05
Knowlton, QC
| reply to kewlkeed
Very very stupid question...
What excatly do you mean add a routable IP...
Also another question I had... Is this a good way of laying out the IP topology? We are changing to the 10.x.x.x scheme soon as well. Would I want the entire "Core" on the same subnet? Would that allow the traffic to flow?
Could you please just give me an example of how to lay out the IPs so that the MTs could communicate?
Sorry again cuz I know that's a totally stupid question but again never done this.
Thanks |
|
