ML
    • Recent
    • Categories
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Register
    • Login

    HP Switches 2530 vs 1950 vs 1920

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved IT Discussion
    networkinghewlett-packardswitch
    48 Posts 4 Posters 30.0k Views
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • DashrenderD
      Dashrender
      last edited by

      Good to know, thanks.

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • DashrenderD
        Dashrender @scottalanmiller
        last edited by

        @scottalanmiller said:

        What I would recommend considering is this:

        1. Get a new switch designed around migrating to OBFN (stackable.)
        2. Slowly move IPs over time to the new IP range as you can do so easily.
        3. Every time you replace a switch, get another stack member and move things over.
        4. Profit

        Would you start with a whole new IP range for the new network?
        For example I currently use
        172.168.30.x main network
        172.168.40.x remote location 1
        172.168.50.x remote location 2
        172.168.60.x remote location 3
        172.168.70.x remote location 4
        172.168.80.x VOIP
        172.168.90.x Wireless
        172.168.100.x VPN

        For my migration should I create something like 192.168.192/22?
        We are closing 2 of the remote locations, so I'll still need two of those smaller networks for them.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • scottalanmillerS
          scottalanmiller
          last edited by

          Well it depends BUT from looking at yours I would use 172.168.30.0/22 and put all new devices above 172.168.31.0 so that there is no overlap.

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • scottalanmillerS
            scottalanmiller
            last edited by

            For security reasons, keeping VLANs or physically separate networks for VPN, DMZ and WiFi might make sense.

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • DashrenderD
              Dashrender
              last edited by

              OK, Let's talk about those.

              The VPN currently has to allow access to both the servers and the PC's because we have some people who RDS into their PC at work, and others who just connect to the servers. Unless I do more segregation, there isn't much gained by splitting out VPN from the main network.

              DMZ - yeah well that's always good to split, assuming you have one. Which currently I don't. Which begs, for a company my size is it worth the efforts of maintaining a DMZ? I currently host email in house and will for at least the next two years.. after that we might be ready to move to O365.

              The WiFi is currently limited only to staff, and even the staff are not allowed to join their personal devices to the network.
              I've talked to the board about offering free WiFi to patients, which of course the staff would take full advantage of for their personal stuff too, but so far they've said no. IF I did that, it would definitely be on its own VLAN for that SSID and only allowed out to the internet, and u-turns allowed at the firewall if found to be required.

              Additionally - is it worth the effort to have servers be in there own VLAN separate from workstations?

              scottalanmillerS ? 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • scottalanmillerS
                scottalanmiller @Dashrender
                last edited by

                @Dashrender said:

                DMZ - yeah well that's always good to split, assuming you have one. Which currently I don't. Which begs, for a company my size is it worth the efforts of maintaining a DMZ? I currently host email in house and will for at least the next two years.. after that we might be ready to move to O365.

                DMZ is necessitated by use, not by size. But often you don't need one, but if you do, obviously you gotta do something to secure it well.

                For email as the only thing being hosted, normally I would not bother.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • scottalanmillerS
                  scottalanmiller
                  last edited by

                  Especially if only for two years. How long before you would have it implemented? At least six months, I'm sure. Then the time frame gets less and less.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • ?
                    A Former User @Dashrender
                    last edited by

                    @Dashrender said:

                    The WiFi is currently limited only to staff, and even the staff are not allowed to join their personal devices to the network.
                    I've talked to the board about offering free WiFi to patients, which of course the staff would take full advantage of for their personal stuff too, but so far they've said no. IF I did that, it would definitely be on its own VLAN for that SSID and only allowed out to the internet, and u-turns allowed at the firewall if found to be required.

                    Keep in mind not all firewalls/routers allow hairpining.

                    Anyway I would not ask to put in a Guest network if you didn't have one. We have one here that is separate and we'd love to get rid of it but people think they need it. We block streaming, P2P and most media type things on it though.

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                    • DashrenderD
                      Dashrender
                      last edited by

                      As part of patient satisfaction I think we should have one. If we put it on it's own internet pipe the cost would be less than $100 a month, but we are moving soon to a new 100/20 pipe from a 10/10 pipe... so we'll have plenty of bandwidth, and with the limitations that creative mentions kinda makes it a non issue.

                      ? 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • ?
                        A Former User @Dashrender
                        last edited by

                        @Dashrender said:

                        As part of patient satisfaction I think we should have one. If we put it on it's own internet pipe the cost would be less than $100 a month, but we are moving soon to a new 100/20 pipe from a 10/10 pipe... so we'll have plenty of bandwidth, and with the limitations that creative mentions kinda makes it a non issue.

                        we have 100/100mb pipes. But if you give a mouse a cookie... that bandwidth can be used up in no time if you let it be.

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • 1
                        • 2
                        • 3
                        • 2 / 3
                        • First post
                          Last post