How to connect a special device in a network











up vote
4
down vote

favorite












I have a question which is puzzling me.



I have a couple of custom electronic devices (are identical, one is a master and the other is a slave) which implement only up to level 2 of the ISO/OSI layer, so they have only a (different) MAC address



If I connect one of them to my PC with a straight connection (e.g. the ethernet cable from the PC's ethernet card to the ethernet port of the device) , then I can connect and exchange data.



Now I have a more complex situation to handle.



The two devices are installed on a pole along with an IP camera. These 3 elements are named “sensor group”. I can have up to 7 sensor groups installed in a given area, for a specific task.



I need to connect those 7 sensor groups to a single local PC, in a room, with a specific SW (developed by myself) running.



I was thinking to use a network switch for each sensor group with a cabling (maybe fiber) to a network switch to which the PC is connected to. So, each sensor group, thanks to its local switch can communicate to the PC.



Now my point is: which kind of equipment I need to use (layer 2 switch, layer 3 switch, hub, router ...) in order to allow both a connection between the SW on the PC and each specific custom device in a sensor group, and to receive the RTSP stream from the camera, too?
I am really struggling because it is the first time for me to face this kind of need with these “only-MAC” devices.



Thanks!
LuKa










share|improve this question









New contributor




Lukariello is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.




















  • Hello Lukariello and welcome to NE. What kind of things are the special devices?
    – jonathanjo
    4 hours ago










  • I'm sure you meant RTSP (real time streaming protocol, used by some cameras) not RSTP (rapid spanning tree protocol, used on switches), so I edited as such.
    – jonathanjo
    3 hours ago










  • Hi jonathanjo, the special devices are custom made electronics equipments which are able to perform real time environment analysis like specific gas presence in the air. They are “safe” and so communicate via rs 232. Their eth connection is for maintenance and set up purposes and for real time data transmission to perform specific debug.
    – Lukariello
    3 hours ago










  • I understand the need for basic and trusted mechanisms for things like safety monitoring. Nonetheless, you might consider getting them adapted to work with IP, which then frees you up on the networking side. I do a lot of telemetry work and my clients have found a lot of benefit from this, even putting serial converters in for RS-485 and RS-232 devices. It certainly doesn't suit everything -- and often introduces security concerns -- but I'd definitely recommend considering it.
    – jonathanjo
    3 hours ago












  • The point is that the use of serial comm is due to safety aspect strictly regulated by standards which do not allow IP communications. Anyway, my concern is not about serial communications but about eth port connections. That latter kind of connection is only for debug/setup purposes and the point is being able to connect from the monitoring pc to each of the custom device without going near the pole where each device is mounted.
    – Lukariello
    2 hours ago

















up vote
4
down vote

favorite












I have a question which is puzzling me.



I have a couple of custom electronic devices (are identical, one is a master and the other is a slave) which implement only up to level 2 of the ISO/OSI layer, so they have only a (different) MAC address



If I connect one of them to my PC with a straight connection (e.g. the ethernet cable from the PC's ethernet card to the ethernet port of the device) , then I can connect and exchange data.



Now I have a more complex situation to handle.



The two devices are installed on a pole along with an IP camera. These 3 elements are named “sensor group”. I can have up to 7 sensor groups installed in a given area, for a specific task.



I need to connect those 7 sensor groups to a single local PC, in a room, with a specific SW (developed by myself) running.



I was thinking to use a network switch for each sensor group with a cabling (maybe fiber) to a network switch to which the PC is connected to. So, each sensor group, thanks to its local switch can communicate to the PC.



Now my point is: which kind of equipment I need to use (layer 2 switch, layer 3 switch, hub, router ...) in order to allow both a connection between the SW on the PC and each specific custom device in a sensor group, and to receive the RTSP stream from the camera, too?
I am really struggling because it is the first time for me to face this kind of need with these “only-MAC” devices.



Thanks!
LuKa










share|improve this question









New contributor




Lukariello is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.




















  • Hello Lukariello and welcome to NE. What kind of things are the special devices?
    – jonathanjo
    4 hours ago










  • I'm sure you meant RTSP (real time streaming protocol, used by some cameras) not RSTP (rapid spanning tree protocol, used on switches), so I edited as such.
    – jonathanjo
    3 hours ago










  • Hi jonathanjo, the special devices are custom made electronics equipments which are able to perform real time environment analysis like specific gas presence in the air. They are “safe” and so communicate via rs 232. Their eth connection is for maintenance and set up purposes and for real time data transmission to perform specific debug.
    – Lukariello
    3 hours ago










  • I understand the need for basic and trusted mechanisms for things like safety monitoring. Nonetheless, you might consider getting them adapted to work with IP, which then frees you up on the networking side. I do a lot of telemetry work and my clients have found a lot of benefit from this, even putting serial converters in for RS-485 and RS-232 devices. It certainly doesn't suit everything -- and often introduces security concerns -- but I'd definitely recommend considering it.
    – jonathanjo
    3 hours ago












  • The point is that the use of serial comm is due to safety aspect strictly regulated by standards which do not allow IP communications. Anyway, my concern is not about serial communications but about eth port connections. That latter kind of connection is only for debug/setup purposes and the point is being able to connect from the monitoring pc to each of the custom device without going near the pole where each device is mounted.
    – Lukariello
    2 hours ago















up vote
4
down vote

favorite









up vote
4
down vote

favorite











I have a question which is puzzling me.



I have a couple of custom electronic devices (are identical, one is a master and the other is a slave) which implement only up to level 2 of the ISO/OSI layer, so they have only a (different) MAC address



If I connect one of them to my PC with a straight connection (e.g. the ethernet cable from the PC's ethernet card to the ethernet port of the device) , then I can connect and exchange data.



Now I have a more complex situation to handle.



The two devices are installed on a pole along with an IP camera. These 3 elements are named “sensor group”. I can have up to 7 sensor groups installed in a given area, for a specific task.



I need to connect those 7 sensor groups to a single local PC, in a room, with a specific SW (developed by myself) running.



I was thinking to use a network switch for each sensor group with a cabling (maybe fiber) to a network switch to which the PC is connected to. So, each sensor group, thanks to its local switch can communicate to the PC.



Now my point is: which kind of equipment I need to use (layer 2 switch, layer 3 switch, hub, router ...) in order to allow both a connection between the SW on the PC and each specific custom device in a sensor group, and to receive the RTSP stream from the camera, too?
I am really struggling because it is the first time for me to face this kind of need with these “only-MAC” devices.



Thanks!
LuKa










share|improve this question









New contributor




Lukariello is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











I have a question which is puzzling me.



I have a couple of custom electronic devices (are identical, one is a master and the other is a slave) which implement only up to level 2 of the ISO/OSI layer, so they have only a (different) MAC address



If I connect one of them to my PC with a straight connection (e.g. the ethernet cable from the PC's ethernet card to the ethernet port of the device) , then I can connect and exchange data.



Now I have a more complex situation to handle.



The two devices are installed on a pole along with an IP camera. These 3 elements are named “sensor group”. I can have up to 7 sensor groups installed in a given area, for a specific task.



I need to connect those 7 sensor groups to a single local PC, in a room, with a specific SW (developed by myself) running.



I was thinking to use a network switch for each sensor group with a cabling (maybe fiber) to a network switch to which the PC is connected to. So, each sensor group, thanks to its local switch can communicate to the PC.



Now my point is: which kind of equipment I need to use (layer 2 switch, layer 3 switch, hub, router ...) in order to allow both a connection between the SW on the PC and each specific custom device in a sensor group, and to receive the RTSP stream from the camera, too?
I am really struggling because it is the first time for me to face this kind of need with these “only-MAC” devices.



Thanks!
LuKa







mac-address






share|improve this question









New contributor




Lukariello is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|improve this question









New contributor




Lukariello is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 3 hours ago









jonathanjo

10.1k1632




10.1k1632






New contributor




Lukariello is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 4 hours ago









Lukariello

212




212




New contributor




Lukariello is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





Lukariello is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






Lukariello is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.












  • Hello Lukariello and welcome to NE. What kind of things are the special devices?
    – jonathanjo
    4 hours ago










  • I'm sure you meant RTSP (real time streaming protocol, used by some cameras) not RSTP (rapid spanning tree protocol, used on switches), so I edited as such.
    – jonathanjo
    3 hours ago










  • Hi jonathanjo, the special devices are custom made electronics equipments which are able to perform real time environment analysis like specific gas presence in the air. They are “safe” and so communicate via rs 232. Their eth connection is for maintenance and set up purposes and for real time data transmission to perform specific debug.
    – Lukariello
    3 hours ago










  • I understand the need for basic and trusted mechanisms for things like safety monitoring. Nonetheless, you might consider getting them adapted to work with IP, which then frees you up on the networking side. I do a lot of telemetry work and my clients have found a lot of benefit from this, even putting serial converters in for RS-485 and RS-232 devices. It certainly doesn't suit everything -- and often introduces security concerns -- but I'd definitely recommend considering it.
    – jonathanjo
    3 hours ago












  • The point is that the use of serial comm is due to safety aspect strictly regulated by standards which do not allow IP communications. Anyway, my concern is not about serial communications but about eth port connections. That latter kind of connection is only for debug/setup purposes and the point is being able to connect from the monitoring pc to each of the custom device without going near the pole where each device is mounted.
    – Lukariello
    2 hours ago




















  • Hello Lukariello and welcome to NE. What kind of things are the special devices?
    – jonathanjo
    4 hours ago










  • I'm sure you meant RTSP (real time streaming protocol, used by some cameras) not RSTP (rapid spanning tree protocol, used on switches), so I edited as such.
    – jonathanjo
    3 hours ago










  • Hi jonathanjo, the special devices are custom made electronics equipments which are able to perform real time environment analysis like specific gas presence in the air. They are “safe” and so communicate via rs 232. Their eth connection is for maintenance and set up purposes and for real time data transmission to perform specific debug.
    – Lukariello
    3 hours ago










  • I understand the need for basic and trusted mechanisms for things like safety monitoring. Nonetheless, you might consider getting them adapted to work with IP, which then frees you up on the networking side. I do a lot of telemetry work and my clients have found a lot of benefit from this, even putting serial converters in for RS-485 and RS-232 devices. It certainly doesn't suit everything -- and often introduces security concerns -- but I'd definitely recommend considering it.
    – jonathanjo
    3 hours ago












  • The point is that the use of serial comm is due to safety aspect strictly regulated by standards which do not allow IP communications. Anyway, my concern is not about serial communications but about eth port connections. That latter kind of connection is only for debug/setup purposes and the point is being able to connect from the monitoring pc to each of the custom device without going near the pole where each device is mounted.
    – Lukariello
    2 hours ago


















Hello Lukariello and welcome to NE. What kind of things are the special devices?
– jonathanjo
4 hours ago




Hello Lukariello and welcome to NE. What kind of things are the special devices?
– jonathanjo
4 hours ago












I'm sure you meant RTSP (real time streaming protocol, used by some cameras) not RSTP (rapid spanning tree protocol, used on switches), so I edited as such.
– jonathanjo
3 hours ago




I'm sure you meant RTSP (real time streaming protocol, used by some cameras) not RSTP (rapid spanning tree protocol, used on switches), so I edited as such.
– jonathanjo
3 hours ago












Hi jonathanjo, the special devices are custom made electronics equipments which are able to perform real time environment analysis like specific gas presence in the air. They are “safe” and so communicate via rs 232. Their eth connection is for maintenance and set up purposes and for real time data transmission to perform specific debug.
– Lukariello
3 hours ago




Hi jonathanjo, the special devices are custom made electronics equipments which are able to perform real time environment analysis like specific gas presence in the air. They are “safe” and so communicate via rs 232. Their eth connection is for maintenance and set up purposes and for real time data transmission to perform specific debug.
– Lukariello
3 hours ago












I understand the need for basic and trusted mechanisms for things like safety monitoring. Nonetheless, you might consider getting them adapted to work with IP, which then frees you up on the networking side. I do a lot of telemetry work and my clients have found a lot of benefit from this, even putting serial converters in for RS-485 and RS-232 devices. It certainly doesn't suit everything -- and often introduces security concerns -- but I'd definitely recommend considering it.
– jonathanjo
3 hours ago






I understand the need for basic and trusted mechanisms for things like safety monitoring. Nonetheless, you might consider getting them adapted to work with IP, which then frees you up on the networking side. I do a lot of telemetry work and my clients have found a lot of benefit from this, even putting serial converters in for RS-485 and RS-232 devices. It certainly doesn't suit everything -- and often introduces security concerns -- but I'd definitely recommend considering it.
– jonathanjo
3 hours ago














The point is that the use of serial comm is due to safety aspect strictly regulated by standards which do not allow IP communications. Anyway, my concern is not about serial communications but about eth port connections. That latter kind of connection is only for debug/setup purposes and the point is being able to connect from the monitoring pc to each of the custom device without going near the pole where each device is mounted.
– Lukariello
2 hours ago






The point is that the use of serial comm is due to safety aspect strictly regulated by standards which do not allow IP communications. Anyway, my concern is not about serial communications but about eth port connections. That latter kind of connection is only for debug/setup purposes and the point is being able to connect from the monitoring pc to each of the custom device without going near the pole where each device is mounted.
– Lukariello
2 hours ago












2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
5
down vote













If your sensors are layer-2 ethernet only, you must have just switches (and no routers) between two communicating devices. So if your devices communicate with the PC, that means they must all plug into the same switch, or a network of switches. One obvious setup is exactly what you describe: have a small switch per sensor group, and link the seven sensor-group switches to a main switch next to the PC, by fibre or cable depending on distance and speed. But it all depends on the physical layout.



If you additionally have layer-3 cameras, they will work fine because internet protocol will sit perfectly well on top of ethernet.



You only need routers if you have different layer-3 networks which need to communicate. A so-called "layer 3 switch" is actually a switch with a router built in to the same box: you don't need one.



Additionally, if you have VLANs, communicating layer-2 devices must be on the same VLAN. (Thanks @Criggie)



Other relatively exotic setups are also possible: bridges and wireless access points count as switches here, as do hubs and coax ethernet. If the PC behaves as a trunk you could conceivably use different VLANs. However, simplest will almost certainly be best.






share|improve this answer























  • I'm guessing OP's situation is at work, where managed switches and VLANs may be deployed. Might be worth adding "PC and devices must be on the same VLAN"
    – Criggie
    28 mins ago










  • @Criggie good point, thanks, updated.
    – jonathanjo
    19 mins ago


















up vote
2
down vote













If the devices only communicate at layer-2, then you use a layer-2 switch. A hub (layer-1 device) should work, too, but they are practically extinct, and they have the problem of collisions. Routers work at layer-3, and they strip off the layer-2 frame, so that will not work for layer-2 communications.






share|improve this answer























    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "496"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });






    Lukariello is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fnetworkengineering.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f55487%2fhow-to-connect-a-special-device-in-a-network%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes








    up vote
    5
    down vote













    If your sensors are layer-2 ethernet only, you must have just switches (and no routers) between two communicating devices. So if your devices communicate with the PC, that means they must all plug into the same switch, or a network of switches. One obvious setup is exactly what you describe: have a small switch per sensor group, and link the seven sensor-group switches to a main switch next to the PC, by fibre or cable depending on distance and speed. But it all depends on the physical layout.



    If you additionally have layer-3 cameras, they will work fine because internet protocol will sit perfectly well on top of ethernet.



    You only need routers if you have different layer-3 networks which need to communicate. A so-called "layer 3 switch" is actually a switch with a router built in to the same box: you don't need one.



    Additionally, if you have VLANs, communicating layer-2 devices must be on the same VLAN. (Thanks @Criggie)



    Other relatively exotic setups are also possible: bridges and wireless access points count as switches here, as do hubs and coax ethernet. If the PC behaves as a trunk you could conceivably use different VLANs. However, simplest will almost certainly be best.






    share|improve this answer























    • I'm guessing OP's situation is at work, where managed switches and VLANs may be deployed. Might be worth adding "PC and devices must be on the same VLAN"
      – Criggie
      28 mins ago










    • @Criggie good point, thanks, updated.
      – jonathanjo
      19 mins ago















    up vote
    5
    down vote













    If your sensors are layer-2 ethernet only, you must have just switches (and no routers) between two communicating devices. So if your devices communicate with the PC, that means they must all plug into the same switch, or a network of switches. One obvious setup is exactly what you describe: have a small switch per sensor group, and link the seven sensor-group switches to a main switch next to the PC, by fibre or cable depending on distance and speed. But it all depends on the physical layout.



    If you additionally have layer-3 cameras, they will work fine because internet protocol will sit perfectly well on top of ethernet.



    You only need routers if you have different layer-3 networks which need to communicate. A so-called "layer 3 switch" is actually a switch with a router built in to the same box: you don't need one.



    Additionally, if you have VLANs, communicating layer-2 devices must be on the same VLAN. (Thanks @Criggie)



    Other relatively exotic setups are also possible: bridges and wireless access points count as switches here, as do hubs and coax ethernet. If the PC behaves as a trunk you could conceivably use different VLANs. However, simplest will almost certainly be best.






    share|improve this answer























    • I'm guessing OP's situation is at work, where managed switches and VLANs may be deployed. Might be worth adding "PC and devices must be on the same VLAN"
      – Criggie
      28 mins ago










    • @Criggie good point, thanks, updated.
      – jonathanjo
      19 mins ago













    up vote
    5
    down vote










    up vote
    5
    down vote









    If your sensors are layer-2 ethernet only, you must have just switches (and no routers) between two communicating devices. So if your devices communicate with the PC, that means they must all plug into the same switch, or a network of switches. One obvious setup is exactly what you describe: have a small switch per sensor group, and link the seven sensor-group switches to a main switch next to the PC, by fibre or cable depending on distance and speed. But it all depends on the physical layout.



    If you additionally have layer-3 cameras, they will work fine because internet protocol will sit perfectly well on top of ethernet.



    You only need routers if you have different layer-3 networks which need to communicate. A so-called "layer 3 switch" is actually a switch with a router built in to the same box: you don't need one.



    Additionally, if you have VLANs, communicating layer-2 devices must be on the same VLAN. (Thanks @Criggie)



    Other relatively exotic setups are also possible: bridges and wireless access points count as switches here, as do hubs and coax ethernet. If the PC behaves as a trunk you could conceivably use different VLANs. However, simplest will almost certainly be best.






    share|improve this answer














    If your sensors are layer-2 ethernet only, you must have just switches (and no routers) between two communicating devices. So if your devices communicate with the PC, that means they must all plug into the same switch, or a network of switches. One obvious setup is exactly what you describe: have a small switch per sensor group, and link the seven sensor-group switches to a main switch next to the PC, by fibre or cable depending on distance and speed. But it all depends on the physical layout.



    If you additionally have layer-3 cameras, they will work fine because internet protocol will sit perfectly well on top of ethernet.



    You only need routers if you have different layer-3 networks which need to communicate. A so-called "layer 3 switch" is actually a switch with a router built in to the same box: you don't need one.



    Additionally, if you have VLANs, communicating layer-2 devices must be on the same VLAN. (Thanks @Criggie)



    Other relatively exotic setups are also possible: bridges and wireless access points count as switches here, as do hubs and coax ethernet. If the PC behaves as a trunk you could conceivably use different VLANs. However, simplest will almost certainly be best.







    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited 20 mins ago

























    answered 4 hours ago









    jonathanjo

    10.1k1632




    10.1k1632












    • I'm guessing OP's situation is at work, where managed switches and VLANs may be deployed. Might be worth adding "PC and devices must be on the same VLAN"
      – Criggie
      28 mins ago










    • @Criggie good point, thanks, updated.
      – jonathanjo
      19 mins ago


















    • I'm guessing OP's situation is at work, where managed switches and VLANs may be deployed. Might be worth adding "PC and devices must be on the same VLAN"
      – Criggie
      28 mins ago










    • @Criggie good point, thanks, updated.
      – jonathanjo
      19 mins ago
















    I'm guessing OP's situation is at work, where managed switches and VLANs may be deployed. Might be worth adding "PC and devices must be on the same VLAN"
    – Criggie
    28 mins ago




    I'm guessing OP's situation is at work, where managed switches and VLANs may be deployed. Might be worth adding "PC and devices must be on the same VLAN"
    – Criggie
    28 mins ago












    @Criggie good point, thanks, updated.
    – jonathanjo
    19 mins ago




    @Criggie good point, thanks, updated.
    – jonathanjo
    19 mins ago










    up vote
    2
    down vote













    If the devices only communicate at layer-2, then you use a layer-2 switch. A hub (layer-1 device) should work, too, but they are practically extinct, and they have the problem of collisions. Routers work at layer-3, and they strip off the layer-2 frame, so that will not work for layer-2 communications.






    share|improve this answer



























      up vote
      2
      down vote













      If the devices only communicate at layer-2, then you use a layer-2 switch. A hub (layer-1 device) should work, too, but they are practically extinct, and they have the problem of collisions. Routers work at layer-3, and they strip off the layer-2 frame, so that will not work for layer-2 communications.






      share|improve this answer

























        up vote
        2
        down vote










        up vote
        2
        down vote









        If the devices only communicate at layer-2, then you use a layer-2 switch. A hub (layer-1 device) should work, too, but they are practically extinct, and they have the problem of collisions. Routers work at layer-3, and they strip off the layer-2 frame, so that will not work for layer-2 communications.






        share|improve this answer














        If the devices only communicate at layer-2, then you use a layer-2 switch. A hub (layer-1 device) should work, too, but they are practically extinct, and they have the problem of collisions. Routers work at layer-3, and they strip off the layer-2 frame, so that will not work for layer-2 communications.







        share|improve this answer














        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer








        edited 4 hours ago

























        answered 4 hours ago









        Ron Maupin

        61.3k1161110




        61.3k1161110






















            Lukariello is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            Lukariello is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













            Lukariello is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












            Lukariello is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
















            Thanks for contributing an answer to Network Engineering Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





            Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


            Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fnetworkengineering.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f55487%2fhow-to-connect-a-special-device-in-a-network%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            List directoties down one level, excluding some named directories and files

            list processes belonging to a network namespace

            list systemd RuntimeDirectory mounts