Take the 2-minute tour ×
Server Fault is a question and answer site for professional system and network administrators. It's 100% free, no registration required.

We currently have two sites connected via a vpn over a 4mb leased line.

Site 1:  172.16.0.0/24
Site 2:  192.16.0.3/24

Thankfully the contract is about to end, so we are looking at upgrading to a 100mbps short haul / ethernet extension - the equivalent of connecting the two networks directly via cat5.

I had assumed that because we have layer 2 access and rj45 plugs at each site we could bridge the connections quite easily, however our cisco provider recommends a switch at each end performing layer 3 routing - because of the 100mbps speed we need good performance to the tune of approx 3k each.

Any help would be appreciated.

share|improve this question
add comment

1 Answer

up vote 3 down vote accepted

I was in a similar situation a couple years ago. A routed connection would be the better route to go, especially considering that you already have two defined subnets. Why allow any more across that line then is explicitly needed?

For the scale of your network a couple of basic 2900 series routers would be sufficient - $1,200 each.

share|improve this answer
    
thanks - a couple of 2901's certainly appear to be sufficient - especially thanks to their routing performance guide cisco.com/web/partners/downloads/765/tools/quickreference/… –  Mark Robinson Sep 6 '11 at 7:35
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.