home network layout

[xyyz]

Some of you might know I wanted to do a slightly more complex home network. The idea was to keep workstations on one network and the servers on another network. The workstations would be under the linksys broadband router and the servers under the Cisco 806. The 806 would be connected to the DSL modem

I had one idea and I was given one idea.

Which would be better?

given idea:

subnet 192.168.1.0 into two networks ... 192.168.1.64 and 192.168.1.128

Cisco 806 - external ip address/192.168.1.65
server 1 - 192.168.1.70
server 2 - 192.168.1.66
server 3 - 192.168.1.67
tenative server 4 - 192.168.1.68
print server - 192.168.1.69

Linksys - 192.168.1.126/192.168.1.129
wkstn 1 - 192.168.1.139
wkstn 2 - 192.168.1.130
wkstn 3 - 192.168.1.131
tenative wkstn 4 - 192.168.1.132


my idea

Cisco 806 - external ip address/172.16.0.1
server 1 - 172.16.0.2
server 2 - 172.16.0.3
server 3 - 172.16.0.4
telative server 4 - 172.16.0.5

Linksys - 172.16.0.254/192.168.1.1
wkstn 1 - 192.168.1.2
wkstn 2 - 192.168.1.3
wkstn 3 - 192.168.1.4
tenative wkstn 4 - 192.168.1.5



would there be any problem with the workstations being able to communicate with the server and access the internet?

 

[Kadarin]

If I'm not mistaken, essentially it's the same network setup, just using a different numbering system (and different subnetting). One possible issue depends on what protocols your servers are going to run. The Linksys box will only pass IP traffic, and if you need to run IPX, Appletalk, or NetBios, it will not get translated through the NAT.

 

[xyyz]

hmmm... the linksys router won't pass netbios? this could be a big problem because I'm planning to run samba on two servers... one to act as a file server and the other a domain controller... if this is the case, it's really gonna kill my plan. :/

 

[Kadarin]

<< hmmm... the linksys router won't pass netbios? this could be a big problem because I'm planning to run samba on two servers... one to act as a file server and the other a domain controller... if this is the case, it's really gonna kill my plan. :/ >>



NetBios is a non-routeable protocol, and will not pass through the Layer 3/NAT connection. (Appletalk, while routeable, isn't supported by Linksys. Not relevant in your situation, however.) Sorry that I'm not familiar with Samba, I do not know if it has to use NetBios, or if it can use only TCP/IP.

 

[Mucman]

xyyz - My experience with SAMBA shows that it is not compatable with netBEUI. I was having problems with it and a quick search on deja showed that everyones solution to the problem was to turn off netBEUI and everything works from then on.

Gotta give props to someone using different subnets on their home network

 

[xyyz]

<< xyyz - My experience with SAMBA shows that it is not compatable with netBEUI. I was having problems with it and a quick search on deja showed that everyones solution to the problem was to turn off netBEUI and everything works from then on.

Gotta give props to someone using different subnets on their home network >>



thanks... just keeping busy until I can fall upon a bomb-ass job like you have...

are you sure about that NetBEUI thing? when I ran the samba setup according to the Sam's "Samba Unleased" they specifically said that I needed to include this protocol for MSFT workstations. I also had to enable NetBIOS over TCP/IP. You need to enable NetBEUI for NetBIOS right?

hmmmm.... lemme reread that section again... if I don't need NetBEUI i'd be more than happy to get rid of a protocol that I don't need.

 

[TW2002]

Netbui is not neccessary for SAMBA.Netbios is. Nbt or Netbios over TCP/IP is what samba uses (in addition to the SMB protocol) to communicate with MS Clients.I would set the *nix box up to route packets between the networks and resolve Netbios by enabling the WINS server functionality on the samba box.

 

[Nutz]

I have no xp with SAMBA, but can't you piggyback NETBios over TCP/IP, or use IP Helper from the 806 (possibly with an extended access list)?

 

[xyyz]

<< I have no xp with SAMBA, but can't you piggyback NETBios over TCP/IP, or use IP Helper from the 806 (possibly with an extended access list)? >>



i can't piggyback netbios over TCP/IP in general or using the 806? I know win2k has a specific option for allowing this... and I know that the 806 has some ability to tunnel other protocols over TCP/IP... I was reading something about this in the manual last night.

 

[Tallgeese]

<< i can't piggyback netbios over TCP/IP in general or using the 806? >>

I think Nutz was asking whether you could, not saying you couldn't...

FYI: The important NetBIOS ports are:
TCP 42, 139
UDP 42, 137, 138

I would go with your idea, and use two separate subnets.
They don't have to be so wildly divergent in numbering, tho.
Simple 196.168.1.x, 192.168.2.x, etc. schemes would be sufficient.

BTW: NetBIOS and NetBEUI are NOT the same thing, despite the similarity in their names (and contrary to popular belief):
Q: Now I know what SMB is, what is NetBIOS then? And NetBEUI?
A: SMB-based networks use a variety of underlying protocols, but the most popular are "NetBIOS over NetBEUI" and "NetBIOS over TCP/IP" (also called RFC/Netbios or TCPBEUI).

A SMB client or server expects a NETBIOS interface. In other words, it uses (or thinks it uses) the same method of communicating with any other SMB system no matter what type of protocol is used underneath. Think of NETBIOS as a passenger and TCP/IP, NETBEUI, IPX, and SNA as different types of vehicles (like airplanes, automobiles, buses, etc). The vehicle carries the passenger from point A to point B. Likewise, the protocol carries NETBIOS (and other) passengers across a computer network.

HTH