Harish,
The Linux box is
absolutely able to handle 50 clients. In fact it would have to any way with the
second option. I also saw someone pointing out collisions. If a switch is used
instead of a hub, there are no collisions at all.
You could group your
internal users and hide them behind different external addresses. But again –
Don’t complicate things when you don’t need to. The amount of simultaneous
sessions is more than enough if you hide them all behind one address.
Regards
/Bjorn
-----Original
Message-----
From: Harish Sabnani
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: den 30 september 2003 10:34
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Network Setup Opinion
Needed
Thanks for ar
advice,but you think that it will be able to handle all the requests from 50
odd terminals effictively? Also any suggestion on the additional Host IPs that
I have been given by the ISP?
----- Original Message
-----
Sent:
Tuesday, September 30, 2003 4:44 AM
Subject:
RE: Network Setup Opinion Needed
Remember that Ethernet is a collision based system i.e. the more
collisions the less performance. Hence large networks are typically have
low performance because of the greater number of collisions. So option 2
would give you better performance because it is broken up into smaller areas
hence fewer collisions, also there are fewer route table updates. So
while the second is more complicated it is actually a better setup. Token
ring would be better for your option 1. That’s my 0.02 cents.
-----Original
Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Enroth Björn
Sent: Monday, September 29, 2003
5:47 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: SV: Network Setup Opinion
Needed
Why complicate things when not needed? The only thing you can gain
from separating the clients is less broadcast, and maybe some increased
security between the groups of clients. The Linux box would also have more to
do in your second option. My suggestion is that you go for option 1. Remember
to NOT set any default gw at the internal interface. This could confuse the
routing daemon.
-----Ursprungligt meddelande-----
Från: Harish Sabnani
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Skickat: den 29 september 2003
19:45
Till: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Kopia: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ämne: Network Setup Opinion Needed
Thank you for taking
interest in my queries,I need a suggestion from you on the way I should set up
my network,I had posted this mssg on the mailing list but had no response,hence
I am mailing this to you,your suggestion will be highly appreciated.
Hi All,
I have set up a Linux Box with NAT/MASQ, and Squid as an Internet server for my
local LAN with one system on a trial basis and I see that the performance has
been great.However I am apprehensive about the way the way traffice and
loadbalancing will be hadled by Linux box as there will be 50 Machines
banging in with requests,hence I have thought of two ways to connect,pls
have alook below and pass your valuable comments. I have a 128 Kbps leased line
coming thru a router.
Option1
50 Windows Cleints with IP Adressese 192.168.0.1-50 GW 192.168.0.100
Linux Server Eth0 with Ip Adress 212.72.11.89 GW 212.72.11.201
Linux server Eth1 with Ip Address 192.168.0.100 GW 192.168.0.100
so I will use Ip NAT/MASQ techniques where all requests on Eth1 will be
forwarded to Eth0.
Option 2
3 Sepearte Networks
Network 1 Ip addresses 192.168.0.1-15
Network 2 Ip addresses 192.168.1.1-15
Network 3 Ipaddresses 192.168.2.1-20
Linux Server Eth0 with Ipaddress 212.72.11.89 GW 212.72.11.201
Linux Server Eth1 with Ipaddress 192.168.0.254 GW 212.72.11.89
Eth2
with Ipaddress 192.168.1.254 GW 212.72.11.89
Eth3 with Ipaddress 192.168.2.254 GW 212.72.11.89
In this case I will have to NAT all requests from Eth1,Eth2,Eth3 to Eth0.
Router Details
Serial IP 212.72.11.202 Mask 255.255.255.252
Network 212.72.11.88 Mask 255.255.255.248
Gatway 212.72.11.201
Host Ips 212.72.11.89
212.72.11.90
212.72.11.91
212.72.11.92
212.72.11.93
212.72.11.94
212.72.11.95
I have abt 6 dedicated host Ips is there a better way I can utilise this,Pls
suggest, I dont want to have a dedicated FTP or webserver.
Thanks and regards
Harish
|
