ASIA PACIFIC INSTITUTE OF

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

INDIVIDUAL ASSIGNMENT

Module Code & Title:

CE00731-M Network Systems and Technologies
Prepared By: [A. Sameera Heshan Rodrigo] [CB006066] [MP14A1CS]
Date of Submission: 7th September 2015

Lecturer(s): Ms.NeeraJeyamohan

NETWORK DESIGN BY USING OPNET IT GURU

ACADEMIC EDITION SOFTWARE

MARKING CRITERIA % MARKS OBTAINED

TOTAL (%)
 NETWORK DESIGN BY USING OPNET IT GURU
ACADEMIC EDITION SOFTWARE

2 | Page
Table of Contents
1. Part A Creating Switch LAN...........................................................................5
1.1 Result 1........................................................................................................ 5
1.2 Ethernet Delay.............................................................................................. 6
1.3 Traffic Received............................................................................................ 7
1.4 Traffic Sent.................................................................................................... 7
1.5 Collision Count.............................................................................................. 8
2. Part B Scenario Hub_Low_Load.....................................................................8
2.1 Average Traffic & Total Traffic....................................................................8
2.2 Traffic Sent Bit/Sec........................................................................................ 9
2.3 Traffic Received Bit/Sec - Hub_Low_Load and HubOnly............................10
2.4 Result 2...................................................................................................... 10
2.5 Result 3...................................................................................................... 11
2.6 Result 4...................................................................................................... 12
Collision Count.................................................................................................. 12
2.7 Result 5...................................................................................................... 12
Ethernet Delay.................................................................................................. 13
3. Part CHub_and_Switch Scenario...................................................................14
3.1 Traffic Sent.................................................................................................. 14
3.2 Traffic Received.......................................................................................... 15
3.3 Collision Count............................................................................................ 16
3.4 Ethernet Delay............................................................................................ 17
3.5 Result 7 Collision Count........................................................................... 17
4. Part D............................................................................................................ 20
4.1 Result 11................................................................................................. 21
Ethernet Delay.................................................................................................. 22
Traffic Sent........................................................................................................ 23
Traffic Received................................................................................................ 23
4.2 Result 12................................................................................................. 24
5. Part E............................................................................................................. 25
5.1 Explain HTTP page response time and DB query response time.......25
5.2 Justify your choice for switch between CISCO 1900 and CISCO 2948.....25
5.3 Justify your choice for router between CISCO 2501 and CISCO 2620......26
5.4 Show and compare the time_average HTTP page response time for
current and proposed scenarios in Overlaid Statistics view. Also calculate
percentage of improvement............................................................................. 27
5.5 Show and compare the time_average DB query response time for
current and proposed scenarios in Overlaid Statistics view. Also calculate
percentage of improvement............................................................................. 28
Bibliography......................................................................................................... 29
3 | Page
List of Figures

Figure 1 - 16 Node Hub Network.................................................................................... 5

Figure 2 - HUB ONLY: Ethernet Delay............................................................................ 6
Figure 3 - HUB ONLY: Traffic Received (Bit/Sec)..............................................................7
Figure 4 - Traffic Sent (Bit/Sec)..................................................................................... 7
Figure 5 - HUB ONLY: Collision Count...........................................................................8
Figure 6 - Traffic Sent Hub_Low_Load vs. HubOnly...........................................................9
Figure 7 - Traffic Received Bit/Sec - Hub_Low_Load vs. HubOnly.......................................10
Figure 8 - HUB_ONLY: Traffic Received & Sent..............................................................10
Figure 9 - HUB_LOW_LOAD: Traffic Received & Sent....................................................11
Figure 10 - Traffic Received Bit/Sec - Hub_Low_Load vs. HubOnly......................................12
Figure 11 - Ethernet Delay - Hub_low_Load vs. HubOnly....................................................13
Figure 12 - One Switch and Two Hubs..................................................................14
Figure 13 - Traffic Sent: HUB ONLY & HUB & SWITCH...................................................14
Figure 14 - Traffic Received: HUB ONLY & HUB & SWITCH............................................15
Figure 15 - Collision Count: HUB ONLY & HUB & SWITCH.............................................16
Figure 16 - Ethernet Delay: HUB ONLY & HUB & SWITCH...............................................17
Figure 17 - Single Collision Domain.............................................................................. 18
Figure 18 - Multiple collision domains............................................................................18
Figure 19 - Single Switch Network................................................................................ 20
Figure 20 - Two Switch Network................................................................................... 20
Figure 21 - Collision count and /Traffic Drop...................................................................21
Figure 22 - Ethernet Delay........................................................................................... 22
Figure 23 - Traffic Sent............................................................................................... 23
Figure 24 - Traffic Received......................................................................................... 23
Figure 25 - Collision domains in Hub & Switch Networks................................................24
Figure 26 - HTTP page response time............................................................................. 27
Figure 27 - DB query response time............................................................................... 28

4 | Page
 1. Part A Creating Switch LAN

Figure 1 - 16 Node Hub Network

1.1 Result 1

Average traffic = (Packet Size * 8) / Inter-arrival Time

Average traffic per workstation = (1500 * 8) / 0.02

= 600,000 bit/sec

Total traffic = Average traffic * No. of Workstations

The total traffic generated by network = 600,000 * 16

= 9,600,000 bit/sec

5 | Page
1.2 Ethernet Delay

Figure 2HUB ONLY: Ethernet Delay

1.3 Traffic Received

Figure 3 HUB ONLY: Traffic Received (Bit/Sec)

6 | Page
1.4 Traffic Sent

Figure 4-Traffic Sent (Bit/Sec)

1.5 Collision Count

Figure 5 HUB ONLY: Collision Count

7 | Page
 2. Part B Scenario Hub_Low_Load

2.1 Average Traffic & Total Traffic

Average traffic = (Packet Size * 8) / Inter-arrival Time

Average traffic per workstation = (1500 * 8) / 0.08

= 150,000 Bit/sec

Total traffic = Average traffic * No. of Workstations

The total traffic generated by network = 150,000 * 16

= 2,400,000 Bits/Sec

8 | Page
2.2 Traffic Sent Bit/Sec

Figure 6 - Traffic Sent Hub_Low_Load vs. HubOnly

9 | Page
2.3 Traffic Received Bit/Sec - Hub_Low_Load and HubOnly

Figure 7- Traffic Received Bit/Sec - Hub_Low_Load vs. HubOnly

2.4 Result 2

Figure 8 - HUB_ONLY: Traffic Received & Sent

In the hub_Only senario it shows more traffic was sent than Recived Traffic. Acording to the
calculation total traiiffc in the network is 9,600,000 Bits per second. This is due to the Low
intra-arivaltime (0.02). This overload the hub with Traffic and it will not deleiver all the
traffic it received.

10 | P a g e
Figure 9 HUB_LOW_LOAD: Traffic Received & Sent

In the Hub_Low_Load Scenario, Will notice there is no much difference between

Traffic Sent & Traffic Received. This is due to the change of intra-arrival time (0.08)
and cause to generate less Traffic.

Based on Calculation that done earlier 2,400,000Bits per second is the total traffic
generated by the network.

2.5 Result 3

But when compare the Hub_Only scenario with Hub_Low_Load scenario will find
there is a huge difference between the total traffic between them. This occurs due to
difference in the inter-arrival time values that has been given for both scenarios. Inter-
arrival time can be defined as the time between the "start" of two events.

11 | P a g e
2.6 Result 4

Collision Count

Figure 10 - Traffic Received Bit/Sec - Hub_Low_Load vs. HubOnly

2.7 Result 5

Based on the two different Inter-arrival time given to both scenarios Hub_Only - (0.02) and
Hub_Low_Load (0.08), Graphs shows how it affect the Collision count values.

When compare the collision count in Hub_Low_Load scenario with collision count in
Hub_Only scenario will notice the collision count in Hub_Low_Load is very low.

Due to total traffic is higher in the Hub_Only scenario and becomes overloaded, it will not
able to deliver all the traffic that it receives. For that reason, the collision count for the
Hub_Only is much higher.

12 | P a g e
2.8 Result 6

Ethernet Delay

Figure 11 - Ethernet Delay - Hub_low_Load vs. Hub_Only

Above Figure shows that the delay experienced in Hub_Low_Load scenario is fairly
consistent and all packets been delivered successfully.

But that the high level of traffic which is 9,600,000 Bit per Second causes growing delays in
the Hub_Only scenario.

13 | P a g e
 3. Part CHub_and_Switch Scenario

Figure 12 - One Switch and Two Hubs

3.1 Traffic Sent

Figure 13 - Traffic Sent: HUB ONLY & HUB & SWITCH

14 | P a g e
3.2 Traffic Received

Figure 14 - Traffic Received: HUB ONLY & HUB & SWITCH

15 | P a g e
3.3 Collision Count

Figure 15 - Collision Count: HUB ONLY & HUB & SWITCH

16 | P a g e
3.4 Ethernet Delay

Figure 16 - Ethernet Delay: HUB ONLY & HUB & SWITCH

3.5 Result 7 Collision Count

As shown in Figure 15, when compare the collision count between Hub_Only&
Hub_and_Switch scenario, will notice the collision count for the Hub_and_Switch scenario
is much lower than the collision counts in the Hub_Only scenario.

2500 collisions per second occurred due to the heavy overloading of the hub Only Network.
And less than 1500 collisions per second recorded in the both hubs in the Hub and Switch
Scenario. This is due to the Hub simply passes on (repeats) all the Data it receives, so that all
devices connected to its ports receive that information. This process creates unwanted traffic
in the network.

But in the Switch Network, switch forwards data only to one or multiple devices that need to
receive it, rather than broadcasting the same data out of each of its ports.

17 | P a g e
3.6 Result 8 Collision Domains

Figure 17 - Single Collision Domain

Figure 18 -Multiple collision domains

Hub will broadcast packets to all it connected ports regardless of destination &without
filtering. This will generates unwanted traffic between connected nods to the Hub. So Hub_
Only scenario acts as one collision domain.

But in the Hub_and_Switch scenario each connected port of the switch has dedicated
channel to filter and forward data packets. So each port can be considered as separate
collision domain.

No. of collisions domain for the Hub Only scenario = 1 collision domain

No. of collisions domain for the Hub and Switch scenario = 2 collision domains

18 | P a g e
3.7 Result 9 Traffic Received

In the figure 14 shows the traffic received in bit/sec for both the Hub_Only and Hub_and
_Switch scenarios.
When compare the graphs will find that the traffic received in the Hub_and_Switch scenario
is more than the traffic received in the Hub_Only scenario, so that mean the network
throughput increased because of using the switch to connect the two hubs.

3.7 Result 10 Ethernet Delay

Figure 16 shows the delay for both the Hub_Only and Hub_and_Switch scenarios.

When analyzing the results between them will find the value for the hub_and_switch
scenario is much lower than the value in the hub_only scenario. This because of the switch
reducing the collision count and that lead the transmission delay to become low.

19 | P a g e
 4. Part D

Figure 19 - Single Switch Network

Figure 20 - Two Switch Network

20 | P a g e
 4.1 Result 11

Collision count and /Traffic Drop

Figure 21 - Collision count and /Traffic Drop

21 | P a g e
Ethernet Delay

Figure 22 - Ethernet Delay

22 | P a g e
Traffic Sent

Figure 23- Traffic Sent

Traffic Received

Figure 24 - Traffic Received

23 | P a g e
 4.2 Result 12

The above figures show the difference in performance in terms of delay and Collision Count
between the selected scenarios (Hub Only, Hub and Switch, Switch only and Two Switches).
The results shows that delay is less/small and constant in the Two switch and switch only
scenarios.
And the delay for the Hub_Only scenario and the switch and hub scenario is growing and
not constant.
In Switch_Only scenario, each connected switch port has its own collision domain and this
increase the network throughput and reduce delay and collisions count.

Figure 25 - collision domains in Hub & Switch

Networks

24 | P a g e
 5. Part E

5.1 Explain HTTP page response time and DB query response time

HTTP page response time

In the above scenarios there is a web application implemented to simulate and determine the
web application performance across the network. Simulation will give results to get estimated
performance against HTTP page response time & delay.

DB query response time

DB query response time shows the overall performance of the database application. This
includes barriers such as firewalls, processing Load and application traffic across the
network. From the above graphs it shows that the average query response time is faster and
less delay in the proposed network scenario due to hardware& Link upgrades.
.

5.2 Justify your choice for switch between CISCO 1900 and CISCO 2948

1900 series switches are typically Cisco low end low cost product. It has 10M fast Ethernet
ports and two 100M ports, 100M ports support full duplex communication, and can provide
up to 200Mbps port bandwidth, Backplane bandwidth of the machine is 320Mbps. And it also
supports VLAN and ISL Trunking.

2940 series switches are more suitable if the network has 100M distance. The Biggest
advantage is its increased speed, the backplane speed it up to 3.2G, up to 24 10/ 100M
adaptive port, and this increase the desktop access speed. Also 2900 series MAC address
table size is 16K, and it can be divided into 1024 VLAN, support for ISL Trucking protocol.

(Cisco, 2015)(Cisco)
Considering the above current scenario network structure, network traffic and workload there
is has considerable reason to use 2940 Switches for the proposed network.

25 | P a g e
 5.3 Justify your choice for router between CISCO 2501 and CISCO 2620

CISCO 2501 Routers are older version and currently CISCO not sell or support these
routers.2500 Routers consist of 16MB RAM, 16MB Flash Memory and 30MHz
Processor.

CISCO 2620 Router consist of 64MB RAM, 16MB Flash & 50MHz Processor.
Also This router support up to 30Kbps data transfer including below options;

Multiservice voice and data integration

VPN access with firewall and encryption options

Routing with bandwidth management

Inter-VLAN routing

Delivery of high-speed business-class DSL access

Integration of flexible routing and low-density switching

Integration of intrusion detection systems (IDSs)

Integration of network analysis systems.

(Cisco, 2015)

Considering above configuration, Performance and options its recommend to use

the CISCO 2620 Router for the proposed network.

26 | P a g e
 5.4 Show and compare the time_average HTTP page response time for current
and proposed scenarios in Overlaid Statistics view. Also calculate percentage
of improvement.

Figure 26 - HTTP page response time

Above graph show comparison of HTTP Page response time of Current and proposed
network simulation.

With improved network it handles HTTP requests faster. This enables to download pages
quickly and show in web browser in less time.

27 | P a g e
 Initially both scenarios start with much similar delay 2.5 + Milliseconds. In the 1hour
simulation proposed network responds HTTP request faster and less than 1.5
milliseconds.

When comparing both scenarios, current network has 1.5 Millisecond delay and its
gradually increase with the time.

5.5 Show and compare the time_average DB query response time for current
and proposed scenarios in Overlaid Statistics view. Also calculate percentage
of improvement.

Figure 27 - DB query response time

Above graph show comparison of DB Query response time of Current and proposed
network simulation. And in the improved network DB Queries are transmit faster within
the network when compared to current network scenario.

28 | P a g e
Bibliography

Blackbox.com. (2014). Black Box US Page Content. Retrieved 8 22, 2015, from
Blackbox.com: http://www.blackbox.com/resources/blackboxexplains.aspx?
id=bbe_4170
Cisco. (2015). Cisco Catalyst 2940 Series Switches - Products & Services.
Retrieved 08 25, 2015, from Cisco:
http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/switches/catalyst-2940-series-
switches/index.html
Cisco. (n.d.). The difference of the Cisco Catalyst 2900 and Cisco Catalyst 1900 -
Cisco router. Retrieved 8 25, 2015, from Cisco2960.kazeo.com:
http://cisco2960.kazeo.com/cisco-router/the-difference-of-the-cisco-
catalyst-2900-and-cisco-catalyst-1900,a4018802.html
Diffen.com. (2014). Hub vs Switch - Difference and Comparison | Diffen.
Retrieved 08 21, 2015, from Diffen:
http://www.diffen.com/difference/Hub_vs_Switch
Morgan, B., & Dennis, C. (2003). CCNP BCRAN Exam Certification Guide (CCNP
Self-Study, 642-821). Cisco Press.
Saleh, O. S. (2014). Performance Analysis of Shared and Switched Ethernet LANs
through Using OPNET Simulation. International Journal of Enhanced
Research in Science Technology & Engineering.

29 | P a g e