Prev: BGP Next Hope Self with Loopback
Next: pppoe configuration
From: christopher.crn on 19 Apr 2008 11:55
I need to connect two office suites that are located in the same
building, less than 100 meters apart. Both suites have address schemes
of 192.168.0.x. Both suites have a managed switch (Netgear FSM726).
These switches do not appear to have VLAN capabilities. There are
about 35 devices on each side. It seems to me that changing one side
to 192.168.1.x and placing a router between the two sites is the way
to go, but I have never done anything like this before.

Is there some better, easier, more secure way of connecting these two
sites than using a router? I know that a layer 3 switch could be used,
but read this would not support a WAN port, which may be needed in the
future. If a router or layer 3 switch is the way to go any thoughts on
make/model?

If I need to supply more information, please ask away!

Thanks for any help,
Chris
From: stephen on 19 Apr 2008 17:32
<christopher.crn(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
news:d695e3f9-403b-455f-95a2-d6d488e46b4b(a)f63g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> I need to connect two office suites that are located in the same
> building, less than 100 meters apart. Both suites have address schemes
> of 192.168.0.x. Both suites have a managed switch (Netgear FSM726).
> These switches do not appear to have VLAN capabilities. There are
> about 35 devices on each side. It seems to me that changing one side
> to 192.168.1.x and placing a router between the two sites is the way
> to go, but I have never done anything like this before.

the important bit here is missing - what are you trying to achieve?

do you need to keep the 2 networks separate at all?

if not, just Cat 5 or fibre between the 2 switches and you have a link.
the main complication after that is making sure any servers etc do not have
address clashes, and only running 1 copy of DHCP.

or - if they need to maintain separate networks (ie you need to be able to
split the sites again later maybe),
then that is different.

>
> Is there some better, easier, more secure way of connecting these two
> sites than using a router? I know that a layer 3 switch could be used,
> but read this would not support a WAN port, which may be needed in the
> future. If a router or layer 3 switch is the way to go any thoughts on
> make/model?

layer 3 switch.

entry level Cisco would be a Cat 3560, or a few other choices.
>
> If I need to supply more information, please ask away!
>
> Thanks for any help,
> Chris
--
Regards

stephen_hope(a)xyzworld.com - replace xyz with ntl


From: christopher.crn on 20 Apr 2008 08:44
On Apr 19, 4:32 pm, "stephen" <stephen_h...(a)xyzworld.com> wrote:
> <christopher....(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:d695e3f9-403b-455f-95a2-d6d488e46b4b(a)f63g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > I need to connect two office suites that are located in the same
> > building, less than 100 meters apart. Both suites have address schemes
> > of 192.168.0.x. Both suites have a managed switch (Netgear FSM726).
> > These switches do not appear to have VLAN capabilities. There are
> > about 35 devices on each side.  It seems to me that changing one side
> > to 192.168.1.x and placing a router between the two sites is the way
> > to go, but I have never done anything like this before.
>
> the important bit here is missing - what are you trying to achieve?
>
> do you need to keep the 2 networks separate at all?

I would like to have connectity between the networks and be able to
use computer names to locate computers from either side. On the other
hand I want packets to stay on thier own side of the fence unless they
need to cross to the other side (ie No Broadcast).

> if not, just Cat 5 or fibre between the 2 switches and you have a link.
> the main complication after that is making sure any servers etc do not have
> address clashes, and only running 1 copy of DHCP.
>
> or - if they need to maintain separate networks (ie you need to be able to
> split the sites again later maybe),
> then that is different.
>
>
>
> > Is there some better, easier, more secure way of connecting these two
> > sites than using a router? I know that a layer 3 switch could be used,
> > but read this would not support a WAN port, which may be needed in the
> > future. If a router or layer 3 switch is the way to go any thoughts on
> > make/model?
>
> layer 3 switch.
>
> entry level Cisco would be a Cat 3560, or a few other choices.

Thanks, I will take a look at this model..

>
> > If I need to supply more information, please ask away!
>
> > Thanks for any help,
> > Chris
>
> --
> Regards
>
> stephen_h...(a)xyzworld.com - replace xyz with ntl

 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: BGP Next Hope Self with Loopback
Next: pppoe configuration