LAN router

I currently have about 300 computers on the school network, on 2 campuses. This was all set up before I got here:

All PC's use private IP addresses, one campus of about 200 PC's using 192.168.1.xxx; second campus uses 192.168.2.xxx

All T1 and routing equipment is leased. We're moving the second campus onto the main campus, and will need to "combine" these networks into one. Since it was all set up with static IP's, reconfiguring every PC's IP address would be a very time-extensive project. I would like to use some sort of router to connect the 1.xxx network to the 2.xxx network, but what should I use that can handle traffic of this many PC's? I mean hardware-wise, what's the best bet?

This is complicated to explain, just because I don't know what hardware you are using.

If you have a PC doing the NAT routing, then you can just drop in a NIC and set routes. If it is running Linux, you can just alias the NIC you have so it is on both subnets.

If you are using a hardware router, then you could setup a PC on the network with two NICs and setup routes.

If you know what you are doing this shouldn't be hard at all. :)

If you are planning on migrating all PCs to one network, you will want to switch to a different private IP range (10.x.x.x/255.0.0.0)

Post back more information and we'll go from there.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Pakrat
This is complicated to explain, just because I don't know what hardware you are using.

---

That's what I'm asking, what kind of hardware do I need to handle this much traffic? Will just using a PC with 2 NIC's be enough?

Right now I have the two networks linked by a T1 going across town. This is supported by an outside vendor, and their equipment also does the routing and such. The remote campus is closing, and a new one was constructed right next to the main one. So, now we're close enough to be linked directly, we're losing the T1 and associated routers.
We won't be migrating 2 networks together, they're still different "groups", just closer enough together now that we don't need the T1. I also don't feel the need to completely re-configure 300+ computers (static IP's, don't ask me why). I guess I didn't mean to say "combine" them.

So back to my question, 2 NIC's in a box, or do I need to do something more?

It depends how much traffic you're expecting to pass between the two networks. If you don't expect it to get any larger than it was when you had a T1, I expect a decent (PII+, good NICs) Linux box would be sufficient. If you're expecting more than that, maybe see if whatever you're using to connect to the Internet can also route between the two LANs.

10ECsoon - to add onto PackRat and Tuttle, what sort of traffic are you routing?

That is, a print server on subnet1 being heavily used by the PCs on subnet2; an NT domain with only a PDC on subnet1 authenticating the PCs on subnet2; PDC/BDC on subnet1 and BDC on subnet2; limited file sharing from 1 to 2; apps on 1 being run from there by PCs on 2?

The number of PCs you have is not really large but the amount of traffic can vary wildly depending on what you are doing. As mentioned, if a T1 was dealing with it OK there probably isn't a huge amount or else the traffic was seriously slow.

You might also want to consider getting a regular hardware router that will handle as much traffic as 300 PCs could throw at it without breaking a sweat. If cost is an issue, take a look at http://www.usedrouter.com/ or some other vendor who has used devices. Routers just about don't go bad and you won't need lots of fancy features. This particular outfit has Cisco, 3Com, and a variety of other hardware that is seriously discounted.