Quick DHCP/switch question...

[smids]

Believe me, I've tried to find an answer to this question, but thusfar, I've not got anywhere.

Basically, I've been trying out Win2K3 Server and I have set it up to use a DHCP server. I've added a standard 10/100 fast ethernet card for purely internet access, leaving the gigabit port ready to connect to a switch. Now, I want a gigabit LAN at home (with full jumbo frame support). Anyway, I was looking into getting the Netgear GS108 as an 8 port (relatively inexpensive) switch which would then connect to a Brother network printer and the 8 PC's we have (some are wireless - will come on to this later).

Now, if the switch is connected to the gigabit LAN on the server via the uplink port, will the server be able to assign IP's (via DHCP) to all connected items to the switch or does it not work like this? I'm hoping it will work like this as I do not fancy buying a quad port Intel gigabit card, which of course could then be part of the DHCP server.

Also, how would I also connect a wireless AP to this? Would I need to connect this directly to the server, so once again DHCP IP addresses will be assigned by the server, or can I connect it to the switch etc.

Hopefully someone knowledgeable can help me out on this, as I've just struggled to source what is seemingly a simple scenario.

One more thing, I'm thinking about a setup like this, hopefully makes sense:

ADSL > m0n0wall or IP Cop PC firewall > Server > Switch > networked PC's and printer.

Any advantages in running a Domain Controller here, or is this just overkill and not really necessary in this homely environment?

Have I got all the above wrong?

 

[tolien]

The switch is transparent, so DHCP requests would make it to the server.
You could connect the wireless AP wherever you wanted, including to the switch, and it would work fine.

 

[smids]

Thanks tolien, that's what I expected the answer to be. Finally I appear to be getting somewhere.

 

[Snapshot]

Now, if the switch is connected to the gigabit LAN on the server via the uplink port, will the server be able to assign IP's (via DHCP) to all connected items to the switch or does it not work like this? I'm hoping it will work like this as I do not fancy buying a quad port Intel gigabit card, which of course could then be part of the DHCP server.

The uplink port is only used for connecting the switch to a standard port on a second switch. Just use one of the standard ports for the server.

Any advantages in running a Domain Controller here, or is this just overkill and not really necessary in this homely environment?

It depends... If people tend to stay on their own laptop/PC then it's probably not worth it but if they move around, it saves setting up every ID/password on every machine (potentially). You've said 8 client PCs but not how many people.

 

[smids]

The uplink port is only used for connecting the switch to a standard port on a second switch. Just use one of the standard ports for the server.

It depends... If people tend to stay on their own laptop/PC then it's probably not worth it but if they move around, it saves setting up every ID/password on every machine (potentially). You've said 8 client PCs but not how many people.

Thanks for clearing that up .

Well, there are 8 computers and 4 people. My dad generally switches between the laptop and desktop and my mum floats around whichever is free. I tend to switch a lot between my laptop (which I occasionally use for work/study) and my dekstop (games et al). I think one of the computers won't work (XP Home - unless of course I tweak NT it) but the rest are 2K Pro and XP Pro.

The server is already a file storage and DNS server. (I've actually got the Domain Controller running and working with only my laptop joined to the Domain) - I was just wondering the advantages really. I only set it up as a learning experience but now it just sits there all domain like, doing nothing.

 

[tolien]

You could connect a machine to the uplink port (9 times out 10, it's just an ordinary port that's crossed over), but a) most switches don't have uplink ports (given they became redudant as soon as every man and his dog could get network cards that did MDI/MDX for pennies) and b) you might find it disables another port.

 

[MAllen]

One more thing, I'm thinking about a setup like this, hopefully makes sense:

ADSL > m0n0wall or IP Cop PC firewall > Server > Switch > networked PC's and printer.

I also use a separate firewall PC to my 2003 server. Mainly to keep the MS OS off of the Internet and away from the script kiddies. Saves me from having to learn more security that necessary. LoL

I use Freesco on an old 486!! I also leave this to do the DHCP and DNS duties, turning them off in 2003. Works flawlessly with uptime measured in months.

It also will split the load in the house, depending on how many people are accessing files off your 2003 server.

So, IMHO, m0n0wall and IP Cop are good ideas if they are anything as reliable as Freesco. It's not as if you have to learn much linux as once they are running, you can ignore them.


And by now I hope you have it clear that all the PCs plug in side by side on the switch. Server, router, Client PCs, printer, Wirelss AP, etc all in ports of your switch. Uplink only needed if you connect another switch.

The only PC that needs two network cards is your firewall. One will be on the "live" internet, the other on your "internal" network. So if you go with M0n0wall\IP Cop then you dont need two NICs in your 2003 server.


Oh - and don't forget to turn DHCP off on the Wireless Access point if another server on your network is supplying this service.


Good luck with the networking - lots to learn, but worth it.

 

[smids]

Oh yeah, I'm moderately experienced with networking, it's just some simple questions which have held me back. I was unsure about switches and I'm so glad that they are transparent as I've just saved a truck load on a PCIe quad port network card!

m0n0wall and IP Cop are very highly regarded, I know for a fact. I'm just wondering if I'm overpowering the firewall PC as I've got a 1.2Ghz Celeron Tualatin with 256MB RAM for that use!

Might have to dig out my old P133, with 64MB EDO (perhaps build a tiny case for it out of MDF *shudders*)? The firewall will ONLY do firewall duties (not even DNS, as Active Directory requires DNS, might as well use the forwarders). DHCP etc will be done by the server. It's not like my server is underpowered - AM2 X2 4600+ (one core for network transfers and the other to run apps, obviously OS controlled - I'm not assigning ), 1GB RAM (enough for 4 users, even simultaneously - I've been monitoring peak RAM usage), and 350W Antec PSU.

This has turned out to be quite fun. I'm getting a Netgear 'blue box' GS108 which seems a good buy (and supports jumbo frames).

Going to start learning CentOS for when the trial runs out I think (or maybe pick up XP Pro for it)! Still, I'm learning pretty well...