|
Hi
Well Bjorn is talking about 50 Computers,which is
as well as 50 Users at any point of time, as this is an Internet
cafe.
Harish
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2003 8:10
PM
Subject: RE: Network Setup Opinion
Needed
In all Bjorn is
probably correct depending on the traffic, but I think he is describing 50
users and not 50 computers, because the problem occurs with the amount of
traffic on the network, that is when the collisions will
occur.
-----Original
Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Enroth Björn
Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2003 9:30
AM
To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Network Setup Opinion
Needed
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
|
