110 reputation
2520
bio website
location
age
visits member for 4 years, 7 months
seen May 17 '13 at 15:00

May
16
comment Layer 2 Loop Avoidance: Three Switches in Series
ok thanks. Because of the distances between the switches, I think LAG + STP is the only way to accomplished redundancy, but I appreciate the insight and will mark this as answered (once you rack up a few more upticks :) )
May
16
comment Layer 2 Loop Avoidance: Three Switches in Series
re: STP/redundant designs: can you stack over any medium typically or is there specialized connectivity (i.e. those HDMI looking stacking cables I've seen)? i.e. if switches A, B, C are interconnected via ethernet (CAT5e).
May
16
comment Layer 2 Loop Avoidance: Three Switches in Series
ok, when I was referring to that topology, it's "pre-STP", i.e. if I had just the LAGs (which essentially operate as one logical uplink, correct?) and no STP enabled so far, there indeed would be a loop.
May
16
comment Layer 2 Loop Avoidance: Three Switches in Series
also, the statement "my view of this is that purposely designing a loop in your network design is not a good...". I'm not sure how adding a redundant path with STP is a really designing a loop; I thought that was one of the purposes of STP, was to allow you, in your design, to build in redundancy.
May
16
comment Layer 2 Loop Avoidance: Three Switches in Series
Great answer. Thank you. Couple of things: you say, "Your idea of how the loop will work is incorrect." Are you saying my definition of how I understand a loop (the ARP example above) is incorrect? (cont.)
May
15
comment Layer 2 Loop Avoidance: Three Switches in Series
Nobody wants to touch this?
Jan
11
comment Public-to-Public IPSec tunnel: NAT confusion
no. Why would I do that?
Jan
11
comment Public-to-Public IPSec tunnel: NAT confusion
I have port forwarding configured already.
Dec
6
comment Change default from address from Postfix from www-data to something else
This works well, thank you. I usually set the headers properly when sending out through PHP mail(), etc. but wanted to set something as the default in case the headers were incorrect, etc.
Dec
6
comment Change default from address from Postfix from www-data to something else
This had no effect.
Sep
8
comment DMZ configuration and firewall throughput
I see your point, and yes, measuring throughput is really the only way you can determine where your bottleneck lies. However, investing in 100Mb equipment today would be pointless as this is a new setup and all new hardware has or will be purchased.
Sep
8
comment DMZ configuration and firewall throughput
I'm going to go with this configuration and create a "data" VLAN that the multi-homed webserver and database server will be the only members of.
Sep
8
comment DMZ configuration and firewall throughput
Only required ports would be open, regardless: the webserver and the MySQL server will be running host-based firewalls (not to mention they won't have services listening for any other ports). My point exactly re: the router/firewall in between: unless there's some ARP spoofing scenario I can't wrap my head around, if the webserver gets owned, it has the auth token to the database server and can (at the very least) read/write to all tables in the database.
Sep
7
comment DMZ configuration and firewall throughput
@Chris: I agree, it is an industry standard (at least as far as simplified high-level DMZ diagrams go), but I can't seem to locate any documentation that supports my throughput vs. perceived security angle I'm trying to unravel here.
Sep
7
comment DMZ configuration and firewall throughput
I corrected my question to say 150Mbps; thank you.
Sep
7
comment DMZ configuration and firewall throughput
That's the problem: we're going from a 1000Mb connection to a 100Mb connection; it would most likely be a bottleneck.
Sep
7
comment DMZ configuration and firewall throughput
What does that achieve? If the webserver gets rooted, it's on both networks.
Aug
5
comment Site-to-Site IPSec VPN: bridged only
Couldn't you do a combination of one bridged VPN IP that the rest of the office is NAT'ed behind?
Jul
4
comment Client computers would not connect to the Internet through Microsoft server 2008
What does ip config /all say on the client machines? Can the server itself get out on the Internet?
Jul
2
comment Spam addressed to a sender but received by everyone else
Wow I feel dumb; yeah, totally a BCC. Hey, it was Canada Day yesterday and was a few beers in. :)