Foundational Question

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
G

Guest

I want to setup a LAN in my home that will help me learn more about Microsoft
networking and network administration.

I have:

Server - running Windows 2000 server
Clients - 3 clients Windows XP
Router - Belkin wireless w\ 4 ports
Router - Microsoft wireless - connected to my cable-modem

I took some previous suggestions and I am focusing on getting the internal
network working, before I try and connect it to the internet using my other
router.

On the internal network I setup DHCP using a scope of: 10.3.1.11 to
10.3.1.99 - I am assuming then all clients connecting to the network will
receive an address that falls within this scope. The stand for private
addresses are: 192.x.x.x, 168.x.x.x, and 10.x.x.x, correct? I could use any
one of these for my internal network correct?
 
kelly said:
I want to setup a LAN in my home that will help me learn more about Microsoft
networking and network administration.

I have:

Server - running Windows 2000 server
Clients - 3 clients Windows XP
Router - Belkin wireless w\ 4 ports
Router - Microsoft wireless - connected to my cable-modem

I took some previous suggestions and I am focusing on getting the internal
network working, before I try and connect it to the internet using my other
router.
Click to expand...

With multiple routers the most likely problem
a newcomer to networks will have is the NEED
to setup STATIC routes (on at least the routers.)
On the internal network I setup DHCP using a scope of: 10.3.1.11 to
10.3.1.99 - I am assuming then all clients connecting to the network will
receive an address that falls within this scope.
Click to expand...

Not if you supply addresses to machines on different
sides of one (or more) routers.

A router* divides your network into multiple SUBNETS,
and each subnet must have it's own range of addresses
and therefore it's own SCOPE on the DHCP server.
The stand for private
addresses are: 192.x.x.x, 168.x.x.x, and 10.x.x.x, correct? I could use any
one of these for my internal network correct?
Click to expand...

Yes.

Depending on the subnet mask you choose, you will
choose a sub-range (for each) of the range you chose.

For instance (just one choice):

Each of your 3?? subnets might use one of:

10.3.1.x mask 255.255.255.0
10.3.2.x mask 255.255.255.0
10.3.3.x mask 255.255.255.0

*Some of these "routers" have a mode in which
they become "bridges" and thus do not divide the
network as above.
 
On the internal network I setup DHCP using a scope of: 10.3.1.11 to
10.3.1.99 - I am assuming then all clients connecting to the network will
receive an address that falls within this scope. The stand for private
addresses are: 192.x.x.x, 168.x.x.x, and 10.x.x.x, correct? I could use any
one of these for my internal network correct?
Click to expand...

No: From http://www-uxsup.csx.cam.ac.uk/netdoc/rfc/rfc1918.txt:
The Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) has reserved the
following three blocks of the IP address space for private internets:

10.0.0.0 - 10.255.255.255 (10/8 prefix)
172.16.0.0 - 172.31.255.255 (172.16/12 prefix)
192.168.0.0 - 192.168.255.255 (192.168/16 prefix)
 
Can you help me with this..

I could replace the router with a hub and still have a fully functional
network correct? I mean IP address assignment and name resolution would be
done by the domain controller running DHCP services and DNS, correct? Would
the primary difference between the hub and router be the shared bandwidth,
half-duplex transmission, and the fact that all data would be broadcast to
all ports, sound right?

In my situation, if I want to just have a single network (not segmented) do
I even need a router?

Does each segment or subnet require its own router/switch?

So the DHCP server will have every scope of each subnet that makes up the lan?

Is the term subnet and segment interchangeable?

Sorry for these elementary questions. It seems like no matter how much I
read the big picture isn't coming together so I am trying to do more hands on
to really understand it.

Thanks for your time and expertise,
Kelly
 
kelly said:
Can you help me with this..

I could replace the router with a hub and still have a fully functional
network correct? I mean IP address assignment and name resolution would be
done by the domain controller running DHCP services and DNS, correct?
Click to expand...

Yes (in general) -- or you could just set up what
you have correctly.

If you have more than one subnet, you will also need
to add a WINS server (on the Windows server.)
Would
the primary difference between the hub and router be the shared bandwidth,
half-duplex transmission, and the fact that all data would be broadcast to
all ports, sound right?
Click to expand...

Yes (sort of). Bandwith would be shared, broadcasts
would propagate everywhere.

Also note that there are really 3 choices: router, bridge,
or hub (multiport repeater.)
In my situation, if I want to just have a single network (not segmented) do
I even need a router?
Click to expand...

No. It's sort of the other way around: Router divide networks
into different subnets and different "broadcast domains."
Does each segment or subnet require its own router/switch?
Click to expand...

No, each subnet must be connected to at least one router --
you could have one router as the central point of connection
for them all, or two routers separating 3 or more subnets, etc.
So the DHCP server will have every scope of each subnet that makes up the
Click to expand...
lan?

Yes; it is easiest to think of a DHCP SCOPE as a subnet.
(Technically it is a subset of the addresses for that subnet.)

Each scope corresponds to one subnet and each subnet
normally has one scope (per DHCP server.)
Is the term subnet and segment interchangeable?
Click to expand...

Almost. Subnet is a technical TCP/IP concept with a
strong definition.

A segment is a loose term, and may mean all of the
wire (media) on one side of a hub, bridge, or router.

Most of the time we can define segment from context
but it can be a confusing term.

Subnet is much harder to confuse.
Sorry for these elementary questions. It seems like no matter how much I
read the big picture isn't coming together so I am trying to do more hands on
to really understand it.
Click to expand...

Don't apologize -- they're intelligent questions. One of
my pet peeves is those using words they don't understand;
especially so-called experts who use them incorrectly and
further confuse beginners.
Thanks for your time and expertise,
Kelly
Click to expand...

You are welcome.
 
Kelly,

Cisco has split its CCNA certification into two exams to make it more
palatable to beginners and to break the exam into smaller chunks (and maybe
to sell more books.) They have a network fundamentals book that would be
great for you. This explains routers and switches as well as subnetting and
network setup without getting too much into the specific Cisco commands and
methods.

Go onto Amazon or Half.com and grab one of those for cheap.
 
Thanks Ryan,

I will look on Amazon and order.

My domain controller is up and running. DHCP appears to be working. All
clients attaching to the network are receiving IP addresses that fall in the
scope I created (as well as the designated subnet mask). I installed DNS, but
didn't configure it. It would appear to be working because I can ping hosts
by name. This does confirm that DNS is working right? I did choose to use my
router as an access point instead of as a router and in turn klet my domain
controller handle DHCP. In an office environment would you let the router
handle DHCP, the domain controller, or a seperate DHCP server?
 
Back
Top