You answered my question - I apparently left out 'impact' from the original
statement.

I guess at some point I figured that there would be a performance hit for
trying to ascertain the most specific subnet. It does grab the most specific
subnet, right?

--------------------------------------------------------------
Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP
Sr. Systems Administrator
Inovis Inc.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2003 11:17 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] overlapping IP space in AD sites?
> 
> 
> I don't think I understand your question Roger... I will give it a try
> anyway... 
> 
> I haven't noticed a performance impact due to having the additional
> subnets if that is what you are asking. Then I wouldn't 
> really expect it
> since it should be implemented as a simple btree search. 
> 
> The main reason I did it years ago was because contrary to 
> documentation
> new DC's that were promoed that weren't on a defined subnet DID NOT go
> into Default First Site. They would go into some other site defined by
> some logic that I failed to ascertain which was a pain since we have
> several hundred sites. 
> 
> Additionally when we have clients come up on undefined 
> subnets we would
> rather they get directed to our corporate datacenters versus randomly
> picking some site somewhere. This makes sense since we are basically
> three interconnected geographic hub and spokes networks with the
> interconnections between the hubs. The way the data center and the
> sorting sites (sites with the class-a's) and site links are 
> defined the
> sorting sites end up using the data centers for DC coverage. It works
> out well. We, of course, would rather have all of the subnets 
> and sites
> defined properly, but we understand reality and know it won't 
> happen so
> we try to reduce pain felt by unsuspecting users by crutching 
> as best as
> possible. 
> 
> 
>  joe
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 
> Roger Seielstad
> Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2003 7:09 AM
> To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] overlapping IP space in AD sites?
> 
> 
> Is there any significant performance that you can discern from that
> scheme?
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP
> Sr. Systems Administrator
> Inovis Inc.
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Joe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2003 6:37 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] overlapping IP space in AD sites?
> > 
> > 
> > This is fine. We actually have a couple of class A subnets 
> defined and
> 
> > the subdefine those to more specific sites.
> > 
> > I.E. Class A points to an overall company site. Many 24 bit 
> mask or 23
> 
> > bit mask subnets are then defined to further refine the site the 
> > clients should use. The clients will chase through the 
> logic and find
> > the subnet
> > that most closely matches it and use that site. 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Thommes, 
> > Michael M.
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2003 11:10 AM
> > To: Active Directory Mailing List (E-mail)
> > Subject: [ActiveDir] overlapping IP space in AD sites?
> > 
> > 
> > Hi,
> >    We have a pretty complex IP structure with various types 
> of access.
> 
> > As we develop AD sites for low bandwidth connected remote 
> offices, I 
> > was wondering how AD handles site subnet definitions that might
> > overlap one
> > another.  For example:
> > 
> > 10.10.0.0/16 = Site 1
> > 10.10.88.0/25 = Site 2
> > 
> > The AD Sites and Services mmc allows (doesn't complain) about 
> > overlapping subnets.  As always, any comments or 
> experiences in this 
> > area are appreciated!
> > 
> > Mike Thommes
> > Argonne National Laboratory
> > List info   : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm
> > List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm
> > List archive: 
> > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
> > 
> > List info   : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm
> > List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm
> > List archive:
> > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%> 40mail.activedir.org/
> > 
> List info   : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm
> List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm
> List archive:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
> 
> List info   : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm
> List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm
> List archive: 
> http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%> 40mail.activedir.org/
> 
List info   : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm
List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/

Reply via email to