[cod] [CoD4] Multiple NIC's
Robert Mount
rmount at pobox.com
Fri Nov 7 19:39:36 EST 2008
Here's a suggestion:
Use HFS stand-alone web server any any old clunker as your web redirect.
http://www.rejetto.com/hfs/
--Rob
On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 7:32 PM, Raimo Radczewski
<raimoradczewski at googlemail.com> wrote:
> Thx for the fast answer Eureka, my server is quite... I'd say powerful
> (not for a high class server, but for mid) but on the last LAN's i
> experienced a massive ping rise if someone downloads from my server (i
> dont want to spend money for two servers, so this one serves files and
> deds aswell)
>
> I had like three different ideas on how to use the 2 NIC's best:
> 1 for Samba/NetBIOS etc, (that's quite easy to configure) and the
> other one for Gaming... That would keep the load away from the Gaming
> NIC..
> How can i tell the gameservers to use the 2nd nic? Something with
> bind? I really have no idea.
>
> Second idea was to use bonding, i threw that one away because it just
> doesnt work properly on cheap hardware.
> Third idea was as written above to use one for room 1, other one for
> room 2, but i think i can forget that one aswell.
>
> @Clan DIN0 <p0rn0saurus at gmail.com>:
> I wouldnt post it here if i'd use a windows server, would I? ;)
>
> Regards, Reemo
>
> On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 11:09 PM, Eureka <eureka at fusionnetwork.us> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> Sorry for the multi-post.
>> I forgot to mention that the Servers are all plugged into the Backbone
>> directly!
>>
>> Eureka wrote:
>>>
>>> Hey Raimo
>>> If your only having ~40 people and dont care about everyone having a ping
>>> of ~20-34 I wouldn't worry about using Dual Nic's.
>>> My Pc-Gamers club at our university hosts 2x 30 person COD4 servers off
>>> one box using 1 gbt nic and a similar network setup (extended star using a
>>> mix of gb-uplink/10/100 switches).
>>> We have never had an issue with pings getting higher than ~34 but thats
>>> because of the system we are running on (very old p4). On a faster comp i
>>> would expect pings of 10-20 at most.
>>>
>>> I personally run the servers/network at the Lan's we throw and we use
>>> CentOS 5.x (linux) as they seem to be a lot more stable for dedicated Lan
>>> servers... that and with the older hardware we are using we see a drop of ~7
>>> in the pings on the server (compared to a dedicated windows
>>> server..xp..server 03...etc).
>>>
>>> For our setups we do the following...
>>>
>>> Router (pfSense)
>>> GBT -> outside
>>> GBT -> LAN
>>> This box serves all of the DHCP and allows users to connect to the net.
>>>
>>> Next in line we have our Backbone (1x 24 port gigabit switch).
>>> That switch spiders out to each of our tables. Each table has 1/2 switches
>>> depending on how big the tables are and what switch is at that location.
>>>
>>> Ideally this is how i would suggest a setup.
>>>
>>> Router
>>> |
>>> |
>>> Backbone Switch (Full Gigabit)
>>> |
>>> |
>>> Table1(gigabit uplink--back to backbone) Table2 (gigabit
>>> uplink--back to backbone)
>>> | | |
>>> | | |
>>> | | |
>>> | | |
>>> | | |
>>> | | |
>>> 10/100 10/100 10/100 10/100
>>> 10/100 10/100
>>> PC1 PC2 PC3 PC4
>>> PC5 PC6
>>>
>>> Ive attached the ascii as an image...just incase it wont format properly.
>>>
>>> Also, i will mention that using dual nic's on Windows...Not very happy to
>>> do usually.
>>> I will also note that our Lan's typically have anywhere between 60-100
>>> people and we usually host ~10 different games over a shared network. We
>>> still are able to achieve very low pings for a environment this hacky ;)
>>> If you want some assistance planning your Lan please hit me back and ill
>>> do what i can.
>>>
>>> You can check out our club website here: www.uwyogamers.com (Check out the
>>> gallery)
>>>
>>> Hope this helps.... some....
>>>
>>> -E
>>>
>>> Raimo Radczewski wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hey Guys,
>>>> I'm planning a small server for a local ~40 Persons LAN.
>>>>
>>>> Since we have a limited amount of hubs with 1gbit connections i
>>>> planned to use multiple NIC's with different IP's, connected to each
>>>> of two gbit hubs, which are uplinked to each one 100mbit hubs, which
>>>> are connected using their second uplink.
>>>>
>>>> Some ASCII Art for better visualisation:
>>>>
>>>> Server NIC #1 ---Gbit--> Gbit Hub #1 ---Uplink--> 100Mbit Hub #1
>>>> <--Uplink--> 100Mbit Hub #2 <--Uplink--- Gbit Hub #2 <--Gbit--- Server
>>>> NIC #2
>>>>
>>>> Normal Users connect to one of the 100Mbit Hubs.
>>>>
>>>> My Idea was to tell Users on 100Mbit Hub #1 to use IP1, others on #2 to
>>>> use IP2.
>>>>
>>>> My Problem has probably to do with Windows, i actually have no idea,
>>>> but even if i connect to IP2, CoD4 actually connects to IP1
>>>> Did someone of you try this?
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Raimo Radczewski
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>> To unsubscribe, send a blank email to cod-unsubscribe at icculus.org
>>>> Mailing list archives: http://icculus.org/cgi-bin/ezmlm/ezmlm-cgi?38
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>> ---
>>> To unsubscribe, send a blank email to cod-unsubscribe at icculus.org
>>> Mailing list archives: http://icculus.org/cgi-bin/ezmlm/ezmlm-cgi?38
>>>
>>
>>
>> ---
>> To unsubscribe, send a blank email to cod-unsubscribe at icculus.org
>> Mailing list archives: http://icculus.org/cgi-bin/ezmlm/ezmlm-cgi?38
>>
>>
>>
>
> ---
> To unsubscribe, send a blank email to cod-unsubscribe at icculus.org
> Mailing list archives: http://icculus.org/cgi-bin/ezmlm/ezmlm-cgi?38
>
>
>
More information about the Cod
mailing list