[c-nsp] Large networks

[Randy McAnally]

With the number of virtual servers most of us are hosting you would run out of
VLAN's very quickly.  What I do is static route subnets to host nodes and let
the host nodes do the L3 work.  This takes care of MAC address conflicts,
spoofing, and many other problems.

--
Randy
www.FastServ.com

---------- Original Message -----------
From: David Hughes <david at hughes.com.au>
To: "Cisco NSP ((E-mail))'" <cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net>
Sent: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 08:56:03 +1000
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Large networks

> On 26/08/2009, at 11:58 PM, Gert Doering wrote:
> 
> > Which is why we are VERY happy with "every customer has a different L3
> > subnet" - and yes, this is wasting a few IPv4 addresses, but since our
> > customers usually have more than one machine, it's not "75%".  Even  
> > so,
> > the time of IPv4 is past, and we should stop worrying about it.
> 
> I'm with Gert on this.  Our hosting networks are all configured this 
>  way.  And, regarding the OP's comment about VPS, why view a virtual 
>  server any differently?   Each customer with either physical or 
>  virtual servers gets a vlan and IP allocation for those servers.  
>  The  virtuals quite happily vmotion around the network to their 
> hearts  content.  Each ESX cluster node gets to see the vlans for 
> all the VM's  on that cluster.  No big deal - it's just a dot1q 
> trunk after all.
> 
> David
> ...
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
------- End of Original Message -------