Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
I need some advice on how to set up 2 VLAN(on one switch, I have HP v1910-48G switch) that separate broadcast domain and also share a single internet connection.
Whilst remaining separate so that the two networks cannot communicate with each other.
I'm not sure on how to create vlans on that spesific switch, but i'll give you what to look for. First off you will need to create your two diffrent vlans, assign them their own vlan ID and take note of them.
Then find an overview or list of your diffrent ports, you will then have to tag or untag ports depending on what kind of type that port will have.
Tag - When putting multiple vlans in one cable, or trunking between two switches.
Untag - What ports that will be a part of that vlan
Here is an example. I have one router, a switch, and 20 computers. I connect a cable to the router to the switch (backbone) on port 1. I then connect my computers on the switch from port 2-21.
Now i create the diffrent vlans, i create one that is named guestnet and one called companynet. I then untag the backbone (port 1) with both guestnet and companynet (if you dont want access to the internet on one of those vlans you dont untag the backbone with that vlan, then its just LAN only.)
Now i can untag the ports that the computers will connect to. I tag port 2-11 with guestnet and 12-21 with companynet. Theese vlans cannot communicate between them, which is great for seperating guests from the company files and servers.
Hope this helped!
-Kad
Related
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Closed 6 years ago.
Improve this question
I have a HP ProCurve switch, I recently added 2 new machines to the network, which I had to assign the IP addresses to manually. Now using these 2 machines I can ping my current machine and other machines on the network, however if I try to ping those 2 machines from my current machine (or others on the network) it does not go through. So my thoughts are that the router table has not updated so that's why I can't ping them from machines that have been on this router.
(Not too sure, not enough knowledge yet)
At least I think so. My question is does the Router Table update it's information automatically?
Assuming your HP Procurve is acting only as a switch, then the Routing Table should not be your problem. A switch does not route IPs, a switch is concerned with routing packets via their layer-2 addresses (MAC addresses). The switch determined which physical port is connected to a device with a MAC address, and when it gets a packet addressed to that MAC address, it sends the packet out that port. The mapping on port to destination mac address is stored in a CAM table inside the switch. This is very different from a routing table that maps IP address ranges to physical interfaces.
What is probably happening is that ARP is not resolving. ARP binds layer 3 IPs to layer 2 MACs in a local network. This can be cause for a few reasons. The first thing i would look into is if the switch has VLANs enabled. This makes the switch act like multiple isolated switches. After that you may need to look at your computers ARP tables to make sure they are correct. The arping command will be useful.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
on my current router cisco 2811 i have two subnets /30(fe0) and /27(fe1) ...i want to add /25 but i am told i need an external card: Cisco 2-Port Fast Ethernet Layer 3 HWIC. since thats very expensive i have another cisco 2811 i can use. i am thinking about buying 2 serial cards which i could connect these two routers and place my /25 subnet on one of the free FE ports of the second router. these subnets are public IPs so i cant just move things around that easy since i have dedicated IPs to clients.
questions
1)will this work ? connecting two routers of the same kind
2)are there any performance issues?
running a small hosting company
thank you
I think that the best option is buy a cheap switch that support trunks like Cisco sf300 or C2950, make 3 vlans and create 3 subinterface in C28XX one for each subnet.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
We have a computer that needs to communicate with two routers over one physical ethernet interface. I know this sounds weird, but each router is actually interfaced to an Iridium L Band receiver/transmitter, and we are hoping to double our bandwidth by using two.
I would like to be able to select which link to send data over at the application level, but I'm not quite sure how to do it. My first thought was to establish a virtual IP address in addition to the pre-configured static IP address and use two separate sockets to send() data out over each "interface" separately. My question is, how do I make it so that only one of the routers actually routes the data out to a remote host? The IP addresses and subnet masks of the Iridium transceivers are configurable. Is it possible to make one transceiver only listen to the data coming from one computer IP address? Subnets maybe?
Create vlan inter faces in your machine
ip link add link eth0 name eth0.1 type vlan id 10
ip link add link eth0 name eth0.2 type vlan id 20
assign ip address to eth0.1 and eth0.2 in two networks. Later you can choose which one to bind at application level.
say like this
ifconfig eth0.1 192.168.10.2/24 up
ifconfig eth0.2 192.168.20.2/24 up
Then configure your router in two networks rather than one. Your computer and the routers should be connected to trunk port in the switch. Configure your routers to be in two networks rather than same. Configure subinterfaces in routers so that they listen for vlan 10 and 20 respectively. (how exactly to do this depends on the type of router) I can give you commands only for cisco.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
Here is the scenery. I have several buildings with same subnet IP addresses (192.168.0.0/24).
I need to secure that connection with OpenVPN.
Please assist me how can I organize VPN connection with IP network 10.10.10.0/24
example
HQ (192.168.0.0/24) - VPN 1 (10.10.10.50) --- VPN 2 (10.10.10.51) - Branch (192.168.0.0/24)
I meas assist with NAT if it will be needed or if I just connect , the C class traffic will just be passed through.
Thank you
Since you are merging two nets, you should use TAP interfaces.
TAP (as in network tap) simulates a link layer device and it operates with layer 2 packets such as Ethernet frames. TUN (as in network TUNnel) simulates a network layer device and it operates with layer 3 packets such as IP packets. TAP is used to create a network bridge, while TUN is used with routing.
This way, you will be joining the HQ network with the branch network like if you plug a (secure, pre-shared key may be ok) ethernet cable between them.
But this will likely crash both environments if they are operating now without knowing one about each other. Maybe the HQ router has the same IP as the branch one, or maybe not, but they are both acting as DHCP servers and now they will be on the same network.
Do you really need to merge both nets? I think you should consider to do some network design and let the HQ on the 192.168.0.0/24 but change the n-th branch to 192.168.n.0/24. Then you can do a TUN OpenVPN setup and route between branches and HQ in a hierachical way. It will save you some bandwith too by not spreading irrelevant broadcast traffic over the tunnel.
Thank you
Well you know, I do not have any router installed in HQ side or anywhere in network and maybe that is a big minus (and I will fix that in a time). Now I just need to secure the links between HQ and branches so the optical network provider (that provides links) could not access out data. If you have any good solution please write.
Thank you
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
I understand that a router uses NAT to translate the public IP we get from the ISP to say 300 local IPs. Does a switch perform the same function? If not, how's it different?
No, a switch cannot perform NAT and translate public(s) IP addresses into private addresses.
A switch is a network device that filters and forwards packets between LAN segments. Switches operate at the data link layer (layer 2). So, they are not aware of IP addresses which are network layer (layer 3). A switch keeps a record of the MAC addresses of all the devices connected to it. With this information, a switch can identify which system is sitting on which port. So when a frame is received, it knows exactly which port to send it to, without significantly increasing network response times.
Routers are network devices used to interconnect two different networks (with different IP addressing schemes).