Introduction
This is a Group assessment comprised of 5 Students. All group members must have to present their part in the demonstration/presentation.
Part A (Detailed Design): In this group assignment, you will assess the given case study to design a multi-level subnetting and provide a subnetted IP design plan. You must create a network topology using a network simulator (Cisco Packet Tracer) with the necessary labels and write a report on the design rationale. Each group must submit a report with the IP design plan, network topology screenshot and network design rationales.
Part B (Detailed Topology, Configuration and Demonstration): Using the network simulator (Cisco Packet Tracer), your group should configure the network designed for Part A. Each group must submit a report containing configuration commands and their descriptions and present the network demonstration.
Task
Mr. Sam, the IT director at Sydney Hospital, manages the network. Mr. Sam has requested your help proposing a network solution that meets the hospital’s requirements. The hospital is growing, and the management has approved funds for network improvements.
The medical staff would like to be able to access medical systems using laptops from any of the patient rooms. Doctors and nurses should be able to access patient medical records, x-rays, prescriptions, and recent patient information. Mr Sam purchased new servers and placed them in the data centre. The wireless LAN (WLAN) has approximately 50 clients, with about 50 more due in six months. The servers must have high availability. Furthermore, an IP Telephony solution will be deployed, and IP addresses should be allocated for the 50 IP phones per floor.
Patient rooms are on floors 6 through 10 of the hospital building. Doctors should be able to roam and access the network from any floor. A wireless radio-frequency (RF) survey report mentions that three access points placed in the main hallways on each floor can provide full wireless coverage.
The current network has ten segments, with LAN switches and fast Ethernet ports that reach a single router that also serves the WAN. Only a single link is used from the floorsto the core router. The router is running the EIGRP routing protocol, and they want to move to a standards-based routing protocol. The new back-end servers are in the same segment as those used on floor 1. Mr. Sam mentioned that users complained of slow access to the servers. He also hands you a table with the current IP addresses (see Table 1).
Table 1: Current IP Addresses
Floor | Servers | Clients | IP Network |
1 | 15 | 40 | 200.100.1.0/24 |
2 | 0 | 43 | 200.100.2.0/24 |
3 | 0 | 39 | 200.100.3.0/24 |
4 | 0 | 42 | 200.100.4.0/24 |
5 | 0 | 17 | 200.100.5.0/24 |
6 | 0 | 15 | 200.100.6.0/24 |
7 | 0 | 14 | 200.100.7.0/24 |
8 | 0 | 20 | 200.100.8.0/24 |
9 | 0 | 18 | 200.100.9.0/24 |
10 | 0 | 15 | 200.100.10.0/24 |
Mr Sam would like a proposal to upgrade the network with updated switches that support Gigabit Ethernet to the desktop, redundant 10 Gigabit Ethernet (10GE) fibre uplinks, and Power over Ethernet (PoE), and to provide 10 Gigabit Ethernet access to the servers. The proposal should also cover secure WLAN access with centralised management on floors 6 through 10. Include an IP addressing scheme that reduces the number of Class C networks the hospital uses. Mr. Sam wants to reduce the number of networks leased from the Internet service provider (ISP).
Provide the answers to the following questions/directives in Part A and verify them in Part B by implementing it in cisco packet tracer: 1) What are Sydney Hospital’s business requirements?
2) Are there any business-cost constraints?
3) What are the network’s technical requirements?
4) What are the network’s technical constraints?
5) Prepare a logical diagram of the current network.
6) Does the hospital use IP addresses effectively?
7) What do you recommend for improving the switching speed between floors?
8) What IP addressing scheme would you propose Based on the number of servers and clients provided?
9) What routing protocols do you recommend?
10) What solution do you recommend for WLAN access and the network upgrade?
11) Recommend and explain appropriate security measures.
12) Draw the proposed network solution.
The report must follow the marking guide. Please note that citation of sources is mandatory and must be in the IEEE style. Submission Instructions
All submissions are to be submitted through Turnitin. Drop-boxes linked to Turnitin will be set up in Moodle. Assessments not submitted through these drop- boxes will not be considered. Submissions must be made by the end of session 9 and 12 Sunday 11:59PM. The Turnitin similarity score will be used in determine any plagiarism of your submitted assessment. Turnitin will check conference websites, Journal articles, online resources, and your peer’s submissions for plagiarism. You can see your Turnitin similarity score when you submit your assessments to the appropriate drop-box. If your similarity score is of concern, you will have a chance to change your assessment and resubmit. However, re-submission is only allowed prior to the submission due date and time. After the due date and time have elapsed VIT’s late submission penalty applies.
Please Note: All work is due by the due date and time. Late submissions will be penalized at the rate of 20% of the assessment final grade per day including weekends.
Marking Guide (Part A): 20 Marks
Task | Description | Marks |
Report Layout | The report layout, language and structure should be appropriate. The report should include title, table of contents, table of figures, sections and subsections heading and numbering, figures and tables numbers, citing tables, figures and references in the body text. The reference section will add the references in IEEE format. | 2 |
Requirement Analysis | Detailed Requirement analysis with justification. | 2 |
Network Design | Detailed Network design considering all the questions/directives. | 8 |
Critical Analysis | Critical analysis with a focus on the design of the network. | 2 |
Constraints and Limitations | The constraints and limitations are explained exceptionally well, and a workaround is provided. | 2 |
Conclusion | Provided an excellent summary of the assessment. | 2 |
References | Follow the IEEE Style. | 2 |
Marking criteria/Rubric
You will be assessed on the following marking criteria/Rubric:
Assessment criteria | Exceptional >=80% | Admirable 70% – 79% | Creditable 60% – 69% | Acceptable 50% – 59% | Unsatisfactory <=49% |
Report Layout 2 points | Extremely well structured and organized report; use of professional language; guidelines have been followed. | Well-structured and organized report; use of professional language; guidelines have been followed. | Structured and organised report; use of language is appropriate; guidelines have been followed. | Structured and organised report; use of language could be improved; guidelines have been followed partially. | Choppy and confusing; the format was difficult to follow; language needs to be proofread; Plenty of errors; guidelines have not been followed. or |
| | | | | Not Submitted or Academic Misconduct. |
Requirement Analysis 2 points | The requirement analysis is in-depth and detailed. All of the hospital’s requirements have been considered, and the functional and non-functional requirements are explained exceptionally well. | The requirement analysis is in-depth and detailed. Most hospital requirements have been considered, and the functional and non-functional requirements are explained well. | The requirement analysis is provided; most of the hospital’s requirements have been considered, and the functional and non-functional requirements are explained. | A requirement analysis has been carried out; some functional and non-functional requirements have been discussed. | A requirement analysis has not been carried out; the requirements have been briefly discussed or Not Submitted or Academic Misconduct. |
Network Design 8 points | The network design covers all hospital areas, is straightforward to understand, and is exceptionally well designed. | The network design covers all areas of the hospital; the network design is straightforward; the network is well designed. | The network design covers most hospital areas; the network is well-designed. | The network design covers most hospital areas. | The network design seems incomplete and does not cover all areas or Not Submitted or Academic Misconduct. |
Critical Analysis 2 points | Provided an excellent critical analysis focusing on the network’s design; the critical analysis provided great reasoning for the selection of the | It provided a good critical analysis, focusing on the network’s design; the critical analysis provided reasonable reasoning for the | The critical analysis focused on the network’s design and provided reasonable reasoning for the selection of the | The critical analysis focused on the design of the network; some reasoning was provided. | The critical analysis lacks depth and detail and does not cover the limitations of the proposed wireless devices or Not |
| networking devices and the design. | selection of the networking devices and the design. | networking devices and the design. | | Submitted or Academic Misconduct. |
Constraints and Limitations 2 points | The constraints and limitations are explained extremely well. A workaround for the constraints and limitations is provided, and the effect of the constraints and limitations is discussed. | The constraints and limitations are explained very well; a workaround for the constraints and limitations is provided; the effect of the constraints and limitations is discussed. | An explanation of the constraints and limitations is provided, a workaround for the constraints and limitations is provided, and the effect of the constraints and limitations is discussed. | An explanation of the constraints and limitations is provided, and a brief workaround is discussed. | The constraints and limitations are hardly explained, a workaround is not discussed, and the effects have not been highlighted or Not Submitted or Academic Misconduct. |
Conclusion 2 points | Provided an excellent summary of the assessment, covering all aspects of the assessment. | Provided a good summary of the assessment, covering most aspects of the assessment. | Provided a summary of the assessment; somewhat covered the aspects of the assessment. | Provided a summary of the assessment. | The conclusions failed to summarise the assessment or Not Submitted or Academic Misconduct. |
References 2 points | The references followed IEEE Style; the references were cited and complete. | The references followed IEEE Style; most of the references were cited and complete. | Most references followed IEEE Style; some were cited and complete. | Most references followed IEEE Style; the references were not cited. | The references did not follow IEEE Style and were not cited and incomplete or Not Submitted or Academic Misconduct. |
Marking Guide (Part B): 40 Marks
Assessment criteria | Exceptional >=80% | Admirable 70% – 79% | Creditable 60% – 69% | Acceptable 50% – 59% | Unsatisfactory <=49 |
Network Topology 5 marks | It comprehensively explains the physical and logical structure of a network. It maps how different nodes on a network— including switches and routers—are placed and interconnected and how data flows. | Thoroughly explain the physical and logical structure of a network. It maps how different nodes on a network— including switches and routers—are placed and interconnected and how data flows. | Mostly, it explains the physical and logical structure of a network. It maps how different nodes on a network– including switches and routers– are placed and interconnected and how data flows. | Provide some explanation of how the physical and logical structure of a network. It maps how different nodes on a network– including switches and routers– are placed and interconnected and how data flows. | Misconduct. Not submitted Poor or limited implementation. |
Network design configurations and testing of features 15 marks | Comprehensively explain how your network is configured, including what the configurations are doing and alternative options. | Thoroughly explain how your network is configured, including what the configurations are doing and alternative options. | Mostly explain how your network is configured, including what the configurations are doing and alternative options. | Some explanations of how your network is configured, including what the configurations are doing and alternative options. | Misconduct. Not submitted Poor or limited implementation. |
Discussion 5 marks | Comprehensive discussion, evaluation, results and conclusion. | Very good discussion, evaluation, results and conclusion. | Average discussion | Limited discussion, evaluation, results and conclusions. | Misconduct. Not submitted |
| | | evaluation, results and conclusion. | | Poor or limited findings. |
Explain what you learned in this assignment. 5 marks | Comprehensively explain what you learned from this assessment, ranging from new tools, routing, switching, addressing, encryption techniques and implementation. | Sufficiently explain what you learned from this assessment, ranging from new tools, routing, switching, addressing, encryption techniques and implementation. | Some explanation of what you learned from this assessment, ranging from new tools, some routing, switching, addressing, encryption techniques and implementation. | Limited explanation of what you learned from this assessment, ranging from new tools, some routing, switching, addressing, encryption techniques and implementation. | Misconduct. Not submitted Poor or limited implementation. |
Demonstrate/pre sent your network design and be able to defend your configuration. 10 marks | Comprehensively explained and successfully demonstrated the implementation of at least his/her contribution/part/port ion per group member. | Thorough explanation and successful demonstration of implementing at least his/her contribution/part/port ion per group member. | Good explanation and some successfully demonstrated implementation of at least his/her contribution/part/ portion per group member. | Some explanations and limited success in the demonstration of the implementation of at least his/her contribution/part/port ion per group member. | Misconduct. Not submitted Poor or limited implem |