Netbooks, PDA and Phones Thread, BYOD and wifi network conundrum in Technical; Well once they see what IP to connect to from the bonjour information, wont they use the default gateway, or ...
4th March 2013, 11:58 AM #31
Well once they see what IP to connect to from the bonjour information, wont they use the default gateway, or whatever device you have in between the two networks, we had to make sure zone bridging is setup correctly on our smoothwall.
4th March 2013, 12:06 PM #32
Isn't the whole idea pretty fruitless if the infrastructure isn't there to back it up? It might work now but there is only so much tape which can be used to fix things!
Best thing to do would be to present solutions to SLT and let them know its all possible but *this* is the cost etc etc.
4th March 2013, 12:18 PM #33
I agree Jamo, however sometimes...and slightly OT 'there just aint the money'...and to get it done we need rely on the expertise from this community.
I've found myself in this position many a time.
Last edited by SwedishChef; 4th March 2013 at 12:20 PM.
4th March 2013, 12:30 PM #34
I totally understand that! But is it maintainable?
Originally Posted by SwedishChef
When you leave can someone pick it up? Etc etc.
If you are just one person, can you manage configuring every access point as the network grows? Its not being pedantic is being prepared/realistic. There is only so much one person can do! We have nearly 60 access points covering our school, if I had to make a single changed on all of those it would take half a day!
4th March 2013, 12:33 PM #35
yup...theres always a line that has to be drawn somewhere that makes it un-maintainable.
4th March 2013, 03:20 PM #36
Well I've spent 3 days on this, and it's difficult to do when you're on your own and getting constant interruptions from the rest of the day to day stuff so it gets quite frustrating.
If I can get this working it'll save a lot of money and hassle - it's *almost* there but just not quite.
here's what the problem is KV4J45y.jpg
The number keeps increasing and decreasing.
I can't find any info on why it's doing that at all, typical Linux amount of time I waste at home on it!
5th March 2013, 08:01 AM #37
After more reading, I'm under the impression that this can only be done on layer 3 switches, we use netgear smart switches here, so I guess this idea is out of the window too, back to plan A!
Smart Switches - Shared access to the Internet for multiple VLANs with no routing
In Particular :-
• Broadcast and Multicast traffic is transmitted only in the VLAN in which traffic is generated.
• To allow traffic between VLAN a device working at protocol level (Layer 3) is required
Unless I'm mistaken.
5th March 2013, 08:24 AM #38
You are right, to bridge VLANs you need layer3, there is a technology that lets it work from one VLAN to another without layer3 but it is messy when applied to anything other than a really small network, I first saw it on a DLink switch and thought eep, nightmare when scaled.
Originally Posted by caffrey
5th March 2013, 08:26 AM #39
Do the Vlans contain separate Networks (is in addresses and subnetmasks) you need either a router or a layer 3 switch set to route between the networks as the addresses prevent the two networks talking even if you directly connect the vlans (not a good idea!!). you can do it on any router or L3 switch or even a Linux PC set as a router if you must, but you must set up some form of router. this only needs to be done once and one interface on a professional router or pc that can handle vlans. then trunk the vlans through into your switches and out to clients.
Originally Posted by caffrey
5th March 2013, 08:33 AM #40
By default even a layer 3 device won't let multicast or broadcast traverse VLANs. Broadcast is done with a IPHelper address usually and multicast requires some PIM setup to traverse the VLANs.
Originally Posted by januttall
5th March 2013, 08:42 AM #41
Yep, gave up on it now as a bad idea, I'll have to consider the split domain idea - cheapest in terms of cost but not in time
Just retried again in vain using 2 nics, wasn't expecting it to work and it didn't , not all is lost, I like playing with Linux
Last edited by caffrey; 5th March 2013 at 08:49 AM.
5th March 2013, 08:54 AM #42
Perhaps just get a core switch that does L3 routing? That's all you need!
5th March 2013, 09:20 AM #43
Using sub-nets is a way of cutting down on broadcast traffic why would you want to have your broadcasts traversing your sub-nets, increasing your used bandwidth. also broadcasts for one network wont work on another as its a different range of addresses there for only serving as a way of adding to your traffic. your Multicast i can understand you wanting to get it to transverse your sub-nets.
Originally Posted by Jamo
Subnet = Difrent IP range denoted by the Subnet mask.
Last edited by januttall; 5th March 2013 at 09:22 AM.
5th March 2013, 09:34 AM #44
Caffrey, this is why the ubuntu server sits in both VLANS, ie: it has a leg in both ponds, ours is a vitrual machine with an interface per vlan.
Once it picks up the broadcast in one VLAN it then will bridge it to the other, however I still think you need IP routing between the VLAN's or somekind of firewall allowing the traffic to traverse.
5th March 2013, 09:41 AM #45
It is broadcasting, just not routing that's the problem - I can only assume it's now to do with the switches as I've tried everything else, you can see by the screenshot what's happening.
I can ping .local on either vlan and it resolves, a traceroute however and they disappear outside the network.
So many factors it could be and I've tried everything I can think of.
set statics and set them in smoothwall to be ignored , different hardware etc. It just doesn't want to play ball!
By in forum Network and Classroom Management
Last Post: 23rd November 2007, 01:12 PM
By SpecialAgent in forum Educational IT Jobs
Last Post: 13th July 2007, 10:12 AM
By maniac in forum Windows
Last Post: 30th April 2007, 06:10 PM
By ninjabeaver in forum Wireless Networks
Last Post: 2nd December 2005, 10:50 AM
By woody in forum Wireless Networks
Last Post: 2nd December 2005, 10:43 AM
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)