<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: MGMT VLAN Design Question in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/mgmt-vlan-design-question/m-p/4143144#M1073457</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;It's personal preference, I've found when given the opportunity it's common to map an IP network to the VLAN ID.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I prefer to keep the networks contigious, so in the example below....&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;VLAN &lt;STRONG&gt;2&lt;/STRONG&gt; - 10.50.&lt;STRONG&gt;2&lt;/STRONG&gt;.0/24 MGMT&lt;BR /&gt;VLAN &lt;STRONG&gt;3&lt;/STRONG&gt; - 10.50.&lt;STRONG&gt;3&lt;/STRONG&gt;.0/24 DRAC&lt;BR /&gt;VLAN &lt;STRONG&gt;4&lt;/STRONG&gt; - 10.50.&lt;STRONG&gt;4&lt;/STRONG&gt;.0/24 SERVERS&lt;BR /&gt;VLAN &lt;STRONG&gt;5&lt;/STRONG&gt; - 10.50.&lt;STRONG&gt;5&lt;/STRONG&gt;.0/24 DATA WIRED&lt;BR /&gt;VLAN &lt;STRONG&gt;6&lt;/STRONG&gt; - 10.50.&lt;STRONG&gt;6&lt;/STRONG&gt;.0/24 DATA WIFI&lt;BR /&gt;VLAN &lt;STRONG&gt;7&lt;/STRONG&gt; - 10.50.&lt;STRONG&gt;7&lt;/STRONG&gt;.0/24 VOIP&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;....all of those /24 networks can be summarised as 10.50.0.0/21. When using a VPN we can establish a tunnel (2 x unidirectional IPSec SA per network) for the /21 network instead of multiple IPSec SA for each /24 (14 x unidirectional IPSec SAs), this improves performance.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;It's also a waste of the /16, the rest of that network may in future be useful.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;HTH&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 Aug 2020 16:14:21 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Rob Ingram</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2020-08-28T16:14:21Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>MGMT VLAN Design Question</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/mgmt-vlan-design-question/m-p/4143117#M1073455</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;&amp;nbsp;I have a MGMT Vlan ID question. (simple design question) &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;We have merged companies and are replacing network equipment. As we do so, we are wanting to make the merged company into a more structured IP plan for local IP's per city. We have 8 cities. (Boston, Chicago, Birmingham, Pittsburgh, Hilton Head, Atlanta, New York, and Miami) I have decided to make each city a private IP space of the following: &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Hilton Head Island: 10.0.X.X/16 &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;New York City: 10.20.X.X/16 &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Atlanta: 10.30.X.X &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Field Offices: 10.40.X.X &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Birmingham: 10.50.X.X &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Pittsburgh: 10.60.X.X &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Chicago: 10.70.X.X &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Boston: 10.80.X.X &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Miami: 10.90.X.X &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;We are starting to replace firewall and switches in Birmingham as the first city. I have broken down the local subnets for Birmingham like this: &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;10.50.0.0/24 = MGMT = VLAN 1. (Network Devices like routers, firewalls, switches, access points. Also, DRAC on Servers) 10.50.10.0/24 = Server &amp;amp; Printers = VLAN 10 10.50.20.0/24 = Data = End User Workstations on Wired Network 10.50.30.0/23 = Wireless = End User Workstations on Wireless Network 10.50.100.0/24 = VOIP = All VOIP Phones 10.50.250.0/29 = Possible FTD to LAN EIGRP subnet However, I know that using VLAN 1 for the MGMT ID is not best practice. &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;I can't think of a number for the MGMT VLAN ID.. I want this VLAN ID to be the same in each city, like "99" or something. I know this might be a crazy question, but I want to design the MGMT VLAN ID and subnet the best possible. Should I skip the 10.50.0.0/24 and use 10.50.99.0/24 as the MGMT VLAN? I'm trying to make it simple. Any help would be appreciated. &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Aug 2020 15:27:30 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/mgmt-vlan-design-question/m-p/4143117#M1073455</guid>
      <dc:creator>jencisco001</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-08-28T15:27:30Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: MGMT VLAN Design Question</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/mgmt-vlan-design-question/m-p/4143144#M1073457</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;It's personal preference, I've found when given the opportunity it's common to map an IP network to the VLAN ID.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I prefer to keep the networks contigious, so in the example below....&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;VLAN &lt;STRONG&gt;2&lt;/STRONG&gt; - 10.50.&lt;STRONG&gt;2&lt;/STRONG&gt;.0/24 MGMT&lt;BR /&gt;VLAN &lt;STRONG&gt;3&lt;/STRONG&gt; - 10.50.&lt;STRONG&gt;3&lt;/STRONG&gt;.0/24 DRAC&lt;BR /&gt;VLAN &lt;STRONG&gt;4&lt;/STRONG&gt; - 10.50.&lt;STRONG&gt;4&lt;/STRONG&gt;.0/24 SERVERS&lt;BR /&gt;VLAN &lt;STRONG&gt;5&lt;/STRONG&gt; - 10.50.&lt;STRONG&gt;5&lt;/STRONG&gt;.0/24 DATA WIRED&lt;BR /&gt;VLAN &lt;STRONG&gt;6&lt;/STRONG&gt; - 10.50.&lt;STRONG&gt;6&lt;/STRONG&gt;.0/24 DATA WIFI&lt;BR /&gt;VLAN &lt;STRONG&gt;7&lt;/STRONG&gt; - 10.50.&lt;STRONG&gt;7&lt;/STRONG&gt;.0/24 VOIP&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;....all of those /24 networks can be summarised as 10.50.0.0/21. When using a VPN we can establish a tunnel (2 x unidirectional IPSec SA per network) for the /21 network instead of multiple IPSec SA for each /24 (14 x unidirectional IPSec SAs), this improves performance.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;It's also a waste of the /16, the rest of that network may in future be useful.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;HTH&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Aug 2020 16:14:21 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/mgmt-vlan-design-question/m-p/4143144#M1073457</guid>
      <dc:creator>Rob Ingram</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-08-28T16:14:21Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: MGMT VLAN Design Question</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/mgmt-vlan-design-question/m-p/4143153#M1073458</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Thanks so much for this insight! I love that the subnets can be summarized. However, we have found that there are more Wireless devices.. so on our larger headquarters cities.. the Wireless is /22 which would be 10.50.4.1 - 10.50.4.254 range.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;How about for larger cities:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;VLAN 2: 10.50.2.0/24 MGMT&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;VLAN 3: 10.50.3.0/24 DRAC&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;VLAN 6: 10.50.6.0/22 DATA WIFI&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;VLAN 8: 10.50.8.0/23 DATA WIRED&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;VLAN 10: 10.50.10.0/24 SERVERS &amp;amp; PRINTERS&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;VLAN 11: 10.50.11.0/23 VOIP&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Would this work for larger cities?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Also, why did you put DRAC on a separate VLAN? Isn't DRAC just the Management IP for Servers? I understand that DRAC needs to be on a separate VLAN than Servers, should it be moved to Management?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Best,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Jen&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Aug 2020 16:38:29 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/mgmt-vlan-design-question/m-p/4143153#M1073458</guid>
      <dc:creator>jencisco001</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-08-28T16:38:29Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: MGMT VLAN Design Question</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/mgmt-vlan-design-question/m-p/4143167#M1073459</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Same principle, just use a /20 (10.50.0.1 - 10.50.15.254) for the large cities.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;It might be better to have 4 x /24 VLANS for wireless, generally a VLAN size = /24.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;VLAN 4 - 10.50.4.0/24 WIFI1&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;VLAN 5 - 10.50.5.0/24 WIFI2&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;VLAN 6 - 10.50.6.0/24 WIFI3&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;VLAN 7 - 10.50.7.0/24 WIFI4&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;You can then pool these VLANS in your WIFI SSID configuration.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Same for data, use 2 x /24&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;VLAN 8: 10.50.8.0/24 DATA1&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;VLAN 9: 10.50.9.0/24 DATA2&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;No reason, it was just an example - you are right though DRAC would fit better into management VLAN, amend to meet your requirements.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 31 Aug 2020 15:21:42 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/mgmt-vlan-design-question/m-p/4143167#M1073459</guid>
      <dc:creator>Rob Ingram</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-08-31T15:21:42Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: MGMT VLAN Design Question</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/mgmt-vlan-design-question/m-p/4143980#M1073491</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi Rob!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I realized I had a typo with the /22 range - thanks for catching!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I am mulling over all the IP's now to see if separate /24 VLANS would be better or not.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Much appreciated,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Jen&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 31 Aug 2020 15:11:52 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/mgmt-vlan-design-question/m-p/4143980#M1073491</guid>
      <dc:creator>jencisco001</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-08-31T15:11:52Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

