Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations Chriss Miller on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Best way to use to 2 T1's point to Point one pipe 2
- Thread starter DirectOne
- Start date
-
1
- #2
jneiberger
Technical User
That depends. What else do you need to support? Do you just need a Fast Ethernet connection on each end for your LAN? Do you need a firewall?
If you just need to support two T1 circuits, just about anything will work. If you're going to buy new, check out one of the new Cisco 1800-series routers. You can configure PPP Multilink or use CEF per-packet load-sharing to make use of both links.
HTH,
John
If you just need to support two T1 circuits, just about anything will work. If you're going to buy new, check out one of the new Cisco 1800-series routers. You can configure PPP Multilink or use CEF per-packet load-sharing to make use of both links.
HTH,
John
Hello,
Newbie to T1's here, need to connection two locations and looking at one or more T1's. Currently we connect the locations via Cisco Wireless bridges, connected to Cisco 2900's. This does not provide the bandwidth nessecary.
The price for some point to point T1's is reasonable (>$400 each), but the equipment on each end (Cisco Routers) is a bit costly, especially when we are not 100% sure we will stay with the T1's.
Is it possible, just for testing, to terminate T1's in ethernet, and just connect them to the Cisco 2900's. Currently both locations are on the same subnet (since they are connected via wireless, without routers, firewalls, etc..)
Thanks a million,
JJ
Really love these projects, and the learning curve feels like a F14 climb on afterburners.
Newbie to T1's here, need to connection two locations and looking at one or more T1's. Currently we connect the locations via Cisco Wireless bridges, connected to Cisco 2900's. This does not provide the bandwidth nessecary.
The price for some point to point T1's is reasonable (>$400 each), but the equipment on each end (Cisco Routers) is a bit costly, especially when we are not 100% sure we will stay with the T1's.
Is it possible, just for testing, to terminate T1's in ethernet, and just connect them to the Cisco 2900's. Currently both locations are on the same subnet (since they are connected via wireless, without routers, firewalls, etc..)
Thanks a million,
JJ
Really love these projects, and the learning curve feels like a F14 climb on afterburners.
jneiberger
Technical User
T1 and Ethernet are entirely different technologies. You cannot terminate a T1 onto an Ethernet switch.
How much bandwidth do you actually need?
How much bandwidth do you actually need?
-
1
- Thread starter
- #5
We are actually going with Cisco1841's. They have the ability to multilink the 2 T's into one big pipe.
They aint' cheap, but the site needs big bandwidth and ip phones. The Cisco's will also handle QOS for the ip phones by inspecting the frames and forwarding those packet first.
The old adage that used go for IBM holds true for Cisco. No one got fired by buying Cisco's.
Cheers
They aint' cheap, but the site needs big bandwidth and ip phones. The Cisco's will also handle QOS for the ip phones by inspecting the frames and forwarding those packet first.
The old adage that used go for IBM holds true for Cisco. No one got fired by buying Cisco's.
Cheers
jneiberger,
Part of the problem is that I don't know how much bandwidth we need. Monitoring the bandwidth between two Cisco switches, show spikes to 6 MB. I need to perform additional monitoring, and ensure the spikes are caused by the database app, and not by the users playing. Any suggestions on how do we determine the minimum bandwidth needed for this application?
I agree T1's can't be terminated directly on a switch. I saw a few devices that seem to take a T1 (or mult. T1's)and output ethernet. I wonder if the T1 provider would furnish such a device for a single T1.
Part of the problem is that I don't know how much bandwidth we need. Monitoring the bandwidth between two Cisco switches, show spikes to 6 MB. I need to perform additional monitoring, and ensure the spikes are caused by the database app, and not by the users playing. Any suggestions on how do we determine the minimum bandwidth needed for this application?
I agree T1's can't be terminated directly on a switch. I saw a few devices that seem to take a T1 (or mult. T1's)and output ethernet. I wonder if the T1 provider would furnish such a device for a single T1.
- Thread starter
- #7
We just had lengthy discussings with Cisco, our Teleco's and phone vendors. It appears the Teleco's can bundle 2 together for you and hand you an ethernet connection.
We have chosen getting our own routers to maintain control of the internal network and be able to make config changes.
Teleco's won't let you do much to their equipment unless they charge you or you have them set the config up front. It sucks relying on Telco's to make changes or find someone there who knows your set up after it's been initially setup.
Depends on the apps you are running. We were going to use 3 T's, but switch back to 2 and am installing Citrix to manage the bandwidth. Citrix is great for this stuff, but no dos apps. Must be 32 bit apps that support Citrix.
I would look down that road regarding reducing the bandwidth and speak to your Teleco rep. They will usually provide the equipment to multiplex or lease it cheap to you.
Citrix has far superior printing capabilities than vanilla Microsoft Term Services - FYI there.
We have chosen getting our own routers to maintain control of the internal network and be able to make config changes.
Teleco's won't let you do much to their equipment unless they charge you or you have them set the config up front. It sucks relying on Telco's to make changes or find someone there who knows your set up after it's been initially setup.
Depends on the apps you are running. We were going to use 3 T's, but switch back to 2 and am installing Citrix to manage the bandwidth. Citrix is great for this stuff, but no dos apps. Must be 32 bit apps that support Citrix.
I would look down that road regarding reducing the bandwidth and speak to your Teleco rep. They will usually provide the equipment to multiplex or lease it cheap to you.
Citrix has far superior printing capabilities than vanilla Microsoft Term Services - FYI there.
jneiberger
Technical User
If you need more than one T1, you can look at Multilink PPP, ATM IMA circuits, or Multilink frame relay. You can also probably get metro ethernet from a local provider, or even do a secure VPN over DSL.
Directone,
Thanks, you seem to be on the same path that we are on. I have been trying to suggest Term Server or Citrix, but the app is MS Access, and while I think the seperate front end for each user problem can be solved, the programmer is not happy with the possible problems.
I need to chat with the T1 provider a bit more, and see what T1 interface/termination they can provide, and then pick up some "No one got fired by buying Cisco's", but sometimes my but can loose mass (after bigwig chews on it
routers.
Thanks, thanks, thanks,
JJ
Thanks, you seem to be on the same path that we are on. I have been trying to suggest Term Server or Citrix, but the app is MS Access, and while I think the seperate front end for each user problem can be solved, the programmer is not happy with the possible problems.
I need to chat with the T1 provider a bit more, and see what T1 interface/termination they can provide, and then pick up some "No one got fired by buying Cisco's", but sometimes my but can loose mass (after bigwig chews on it
routers.Thanks, thanks, thanks,
JJ
- Thread starter
- #10
We run MS Access on Citrix and it works great. If you use it as a front end and use MSDE or a full blown version of SQL as the actual db and get out of the mdb world, it fly's. We have been using adp's or just an mdb pointing to another db.
The printing and everything will work great.
I don't know what the programmer is concerned about except maybe enhancing his code and making his app less bloated. ; - 0. Citrix's site is a wealth of info to ease their mind.
Also, jneiberger's VPN over the internet is another option to try. Many ways to skin a cat here.
One more piece of ammo for the big wigs is, "Do you want uptime or downtime?" "Do you want users working or sitting idle with cheaper or not the best solutions?"
If you present the options and they don't choose the correct option, they can chew on their own butts and you had made the right recommendation. It's only money.
The printing and everything will work great.
I don't know what the programmer is concerned about except maybe enhancing his code and making his app less bloated. ; - 0. Citrix's site is a wealth of info to ease their mind.
Also, jneiberger's VPN over the internet is another option to try. Many ways to skin a cat here.
One more piece of ammo for the big wigs is, "Do you want uptime or downtime?" "Do you want users working or sitting idle with cheaper or not the best solutions?"
If you present the options and they don't choose the correct option, they can chew on their own butts and you had made the right recommendation. It's only money.
jneiberger,
Thanks for the idea...VPN over DSL corrupts the database. Office with server is 3.5 miles (wireless link) from a branch office where we have our ISP (cable 5 meg down x 560 something up)connected. DSL, cable, etc is not available to office with server.
I asked the programmer to try the application at the branch office connected to office with server, and it didn't work over that wireless link. I use VPN all the time to remote into the office with server, without any noticable problems, but the DB app...it's a bit much.
DirectOne and all the others,
So, I was told to find out about a T1. And I have, and I just passed along the cost...for three T1's. Someone felt the price was a too much. Sigh...now they are talking about wireless again...we have a wireless in place now and it doesn't work (running the DB from the remote location, but if you run the app via Remote Desktop on a PC at the office with server it runs fine.) And I wasn't given permission to install the current wireless link with the antennas, short coax, mast and other small details I felt were best. So, we have a omni antenna, 25 feet of LMR-400, and a somewhat wiggly mast, using an older style Cisco Bridge. Now if he wants to install another wireless link, granted with newer equipment, but with the omni's, 25 feet of coax, etc., will it work? Dunno, but I am writing the cover my but letter explaining what has happened, and what the options are.
We are using MS Access as front and back end. As I understand it, we can run this via Term Serv, but each user must have a different front end. Doesn't seem that hard, make directories, assign permissions, and test, test, test. Can't see why it wouldn't work, and it works over the wireless we have now!
Sorry, I just realized I am venting, very sorry. If anyone has any suggestions, I am opening my ears.
And I will go monitor the bandwidth while watching the users...maybe the six meg spikes were caused by users surfing the web, or something like that. Interesting how the spikes were repeated and consistent.
Thanks again everyone,
JJ
Thanks for the idea...VPN over DSL corrupts the database. Office with server is 3.5 miles (wireless link) from a branch office where we have our ISP (cable 5 meg down x 560 something up)connected. DSL, cable, etc is not available to office with server.
I asked the programmer to try the application at the branch office connected to office with server, and it didn't work over that wireless link. I use VPN all the time to remote into the office with server, without any noticable problems, but the DB app...it's a bit much.
DirectOne and all the others,
So, I was told to find out about a T1. And I have, and I just passed along the cost...for three T1's. Someone felt the price was a too much. Sigh...now they are talking about wireless again...we have a wireless in place now and it doesn't work (running the DB from the remote location, but if you run the app via Remote Desktop on a PC at the office with server it runs fine.) And I wasn't given permission to install the current wireless link with the antennas, short coax, mast and other small details I felt were best. So, we have a omni antenna, 25 feet of LMR-400, and a somewhat wiggly mast, using an older style Cisco Bridge. Now if he wants to install another wireless link, granted with newer equipment, but with the omni's, 25 feet of coax, etc., will it work? Dunno, but I am writing the cover my but letter explaining what has happened, and what the options are.
We are using MS Access as front and back end. As I understand it, we can run this via Term Serv, but each user must have a different front end. Doesn't seem that hard, make directories, assign permissions, and test, test, test. Can't see why it wouldn't work, and it works over the wireless we have now!
Sorry, I just realized I am venting, very sorry. If anyone has any suggestions, I am opening my ears.
And I will go monitor the bandwidth while watching the users...maybe the six meg spikes were caused by users surfing the web, or something like that. Interesting how the spikes were repeated and consistent.
Thanks again everyone,
JJ
- Thread starter
- #12
Wireless sucks. Not valid for business apps.
Citrix allows you to publish apps eliminating need for separate apps for each user. You set by domain groups or users. We haven't run across issues with TS for MS Access apps. Can use base security in Access to solve that, but..
Switch to SQL or MSDE, set db permissions by group, problem solved.
Good luck.
Citrix allows you to publish apps eliminating need for separate apps for each user. You set by domain groups or users. We haven't run across issues with TS for MS Access apps. Can use base security in Access to solve that, but..
Switch to SQL or MSDE, set db permissions by group, problem solved.
Good luck.
- Thread starter
- #13
P.S. We run a 15 user warehouse over citrix with Access, Crystal, Macola, etc...all over one point to point T1.
No major issues, permissions set by groups, etc.
The only thing to stress is massive memory in Citrix Server and printer drivers for servers.
No major issues, permissions set by groups, etc.
The only thing to stress is massive memory in Citrix Server and printer drivers for servers.
JJ, why are they looking at an omnidirectional antenna? For a site-to-site you need a directional one, focused nice and tight, not spewing the signal out like a radio station...
My big beef with Citrix has been the expense of the licenses and occasional flaky behavior (print jobs showing up in odd places, etc.) I've heard they're getting better though. Aren't they still pretty darned expensive?
My big beef with Citrix has been the expense of the licenses and occasional flaky behavior (print jobs showing up in odd places, etc.) I've heard they're getting better though. Aren't they still pretty darned expensive?
- Thread starter
- #15
On a couple of client's we have multiple versions of access, 2.0 (ugh) and 2000, and 2000 SQL. Terminal server run all well over a slow static IP cable line, roughly 378 down/ 178 up. The only problems concern MS patches which are never tested for the older Access version, 3 separate issues occurred after patching, all were correctable. Damn do I love remote access to TS.
As a note, both clients have servers below 2 Ghz, both run MS Access, and most other programs, as fast or faster then most workstations on the networks, via a VPN tunnel ( each only has a few users on at a given time). Recommend VPN for added security if remote access is to Windows TS server
........................................
Chernobyl disaster..a must see pictorial
As a note, both clients have servers below 2 Ghz, both run MS Access, and most other programs, as fast or faster then most workstations on the networks, via a VPN tunnel ( each only has a few users on at a given time). Recommend VPN for added security if remote access is to Windows TS server
........................................
Chernobyl disaster..a must see pictorial
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question