asked on metro-e , e-line, point-to-point networking
Greetings,
I am setting up a 50 Mb point-to-point circuit (TW calls it a e-line or metro-e) between the office and the datacenter. I currently have a VPN between the two. I also currently have two distinct LAN IP networks (192.168.25 at the office and 192.168.35 at the datacenter).
Do I have to keep two separate IP networks with a point-to-point (metro-e) or can I extend the .25 LAN network from the office to the datacenter since it is a point-to-point?
thanks
I am setting up a 50 Mb point-to-point circuit (TW calls it a e-line or metro-e) between the office and the datacenter. I currently have a VPN between the two. I also currently have two distinct LAN IP networks (192.168.25 at the office and 192.168.35 at the datacenter).
Do I have to keep two separate IP networks with a point-to-point (metro-e) or can I extend the .25 LAN network from the office to the datacenter since it is a point-to-point?
thanks
NetworkingActive DirectoryVirtualization
Last Comment
rharland2009
SOLUTION
THIS SOLUTION ONLY AVAILABLE TO MEMBERS.
View this solution by signing up for a free trial.
Members can start a 7-Day free trial and enjoy unlimited access to the platform.
Sure thing.
ASKER
I am still waiting to hear back from them. However, if it is possible, is it recommended or is there a better way to do it?
thanks again
thanks again
Not sure what you mean.
As far as a point-to-point, you don't really need devices on either end - because the two ends are only connected to stuff that you control! Now, I'm sure you could nail up a VPN if you want between the two sites, but there's just not much reason - except to protect your two locations from Internet-based attacks or malicious traffic - coming from the far end of the point-to-point - that might impact your LANs.
Since it also sounds like you have two /24 networks, you *could* extend both locations to use the .25 network without a problem. 512 possible hosts is not too bad for a single segment from a broadcast chattiness perspective, as long as your switching is good at either location.
Just my opinion.
As far as a point-to-point, you don't really need devices on either end - because the two ends are only connected to stuff that you control! Now, I'm sure you could nail up a VPN if you want between the two sites, but there's just not much reason - except to protect your two locations from Internet-based attacks or malicious traffic - coming from the far end of the point-to-point - that might impact your LANs.
Since it also sounds like you have two /24 networks, you *could* extend both locations to use the .25 network without a problem. 512 possible hosts is not too bad for a single segment from a broadcast chattiness perspective, as long as your switching is good at either location.
Just my opinion.
ASKER
I meant is it better, or recommended, to segment into two IP networks and set up a new site Active Directory (already done as currently we have a VPN between the two), or is just one IP network acceptable, supported, best practice, etc.?
If I did go with one IP network for both the office and datacenter, how is DHCP and DNS affected? I already have a DC with DNS (it is a global catalog too) in the datacenter. I am putting our new exchange 2010 box as well as our terminal server at the datacenter as soon as our new storage comes in and is configured. one /24 network will fit us but since two are already configured, should we just leave as is?
This is what TW said:
The service is layer 2 to us and you can use layer 3 without issues. You do not need to segment the network if you do not want to do so.
Thanks again for your help
If I did go with one IP network for both the office and datacenter, how is DHCP and DNS affected? I already have a DC with DNS (it is a global catalog too) in the datacenter. I am putting our new exchange 2010 box as well as our terminal server at the datacenter as soon as our new storage comes in and is configured. one /24 network will fit us but since two are already configured, should we just leave as is?
This is what TW said:
The service is layer 2 to us and you can use layer 3 without issues. You do not need to segment the network if you do not want to do so.
Thanks again for your help
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
THIS SOLUTION ONLY AVAILABLE TO MEMBERS.
View this solution by signing up for a free trial.
Members can start a 7-Day free trial and enjoy unlimited access to the platform.
ASKER
OK. thanks for the help. last quick question:
currently our sonicwall is the DHCP server at the datacenter. should I move that to a windows DHCP server since we'll be putting our exchange and terminal servers there permanently?
thanks again
here is another question I just posted in case you have any insight into this issue
https://www.experts-exchange.com/questions/27983903/two-sonicwalls-firewalls-for-failover-but-not-HA.html
currently our sonicwall is the DHCP server at the datacenter. should I move that to a windows DHCP server since we'll be putting our exchange and terminal servers there permanently?
thanks again
here is another question I just posted in case you have any insight into this issue
https://www.experts-exchange.com/questions/27983903/two-sonicwalls-firewalls-for-failover-but-not-HA.html
Re: DHCP - yeah, I'd flip that to your Windows box. It's a better plan long-term.
thanks again