Assessment Details and Submission Guidelines
Unit Code BN202
Unit Title Internetworking Technologies
Assessment Type Assignment 2 - Individual, written and demonstration – T1 2017
Assessment Title Network design with configuration
Purpose of the assessment (with ULO Mapping) Main objectives of this assignment is to enable student to configure networking devices for a given business case study and understand limitations of a network design. After successful completion of this assignment, students should be able to:
a. Report on the health of existing internetworking architectures such as systems, solutions, data, applications, technology.
b. Discuss an appropriate network design and solutions for medium-sized organisations.
c. Report on the current and future state of the management of internetworking infrastructure and its applications.
d. Interpret a roadmap process to transform an internetworking architecture to support long-term business goals.
e. Apply a process to support the administration and the management of internetworking.
Weight 20% of the total assessments
Total Marks 50
Word limit 500
Due Date Week 11, demonstrate during laboratory class and submit report on Moodle
Submission Guidelines • All work must be submitted on Moodle by the due date along with a completed Assignment Cover Page.
• The assignment must be in MS Word format, 1.5 spacing, 11-pt Calibri (Body) font and 2 cm margins on all four sides of your page with appropriate section headings.
• Reference sources must be cited in the text of the report, and listed appropriately at the end in a reference list using IEEE referencing style.
Extension • If an extension of time to submit work is required, a Special Consideration Application must be submitted directly to the School's Administration Officer, on academic reception level. You must submit this application within three working days of the assessment due date. Further information is available at:
http://www.mit.edu.au/about-mit/institute-publications/policies-procedures-and-guidelines/specialconsiderationdeferment
Academic Misconduct
• Academic Misconduct is a serious offence. Depending on the seriousness of the case, penalties can vary from a written warning or zero marks to exclusion from the course or rescinding the degree. Students should make themselves familiar with the full policy and procedure available at: http://www.mit.edu.au/about-mit/institute-publications/policies-procedures-and-guidelines/Plagiarism-Academic-Misconduct-Policy-Procedure. For further information, please refer to the Academic Integrity Section in your Unit Description.

Assessment Cover Sheet
Student ID: Student Surname: Given Name:

Course: School:
Unit Code: Unit Title:
Due Date: Date Submitted: Campus:
Lecturer: Tutor:
All work must be submitted on Moodle by the due date. If an extension of time to submit work is required, a Special Consideration Application must be submitted. Further information is available at:
http://www.mit.edu.au/about-mit/institute-publications/policies-procedures-and-guidelines/specialconsiderationdeferment
Academic Misconduct
Academic Misconduct is a serious offence. Depending on the seriousness of the case, penalties can vary from a written warning or zero marks to exclusion from the course or rescinding the degree. Students should make themselves familiar with the full policy and procedure available at: http://www.mit.edu.au/about-mit/institute-publications/policies-procedures-and-guidelines/Plagiarism-Academic-Misconduct-Policy-Procedure. For further information please refer to the Academic Integrity Section in your Unit Description.
Student Declaration
I/We declare that:
? the work contained in this assignment is my/our own work/group work, except where acknowledgement of sources is made;
? certify that this assessment has not been submitted previously for academic credit in this or any other course;
? I/we have read the MIT’s Plagiarism and Academic Misconduct Policy Procedure, and I/we understand the consequences of engaging in plagiarism;
? a copy of the original assignment is retained by me/us and that I/we may be required to submit the original assignment to the Lecturer and/or Unit Co-ordinator upon request;
I/we have not plagiarised the work of others or participated in unauthorised collaboration when preparing this assignment.
Student Signature:
Date:
Student Name:

Assignment 2 Specification
Business case study: Network design proposal for airport
Description
Assignment 2 is an extension of assignment 1 work.
The project is to design a proposal for setting up a network in an airport. The airport has three departments.
1. Airport authority
2. Flight service providers
3. Guests
The airport authority maintains a server which handles the flight management controls. The flight service providers should have access only to the specific server in the airport authority network and not to any other systems. The guest users should have wireless access to a high speed internet connection, which should be shared among all the users in all the departments.
The wireless access should be using a common password. The guest users should not have access to the other two departments. The users should obtain IP addresses automatically. The airport authority has 20 users, the flight service providers have 40 users and the maximum numbers of guests are estimated to be 100.
Write a report with the following contents
• Detailed Network Design in Netsim (You should not use packet tracer) which includes
- Minimum of 2 switches
- Minimum of 3 routers
- VLAN
- VTP
- 2 PCs
• Network device configurations
a. Switch configuration:
- Set IP addresses on PC and switch
- Create VLAN
- Ping each other
- Set VTP domain with your first name
- Set VTP password with your family name
- Demonstrate VTP packets
b. Router configuration
- set descriptions on interfaces, one with your name, second with your family name, third with your middle name
- display information about directly connected devices to router
- Setup IP addresses for each interfaces
- What is the subnet mask did you use?
- Ping all 3 routers.
Demonstrate working of whole network.

Marking criteria
Section to be included in the report Description of the section Marks
Detailed Network Design in Netsim - Minimum of 2 switches
- Minimum of 3 routers
- VLAN
- 2 PCs 6
Switch configuration - Set IP addresses on PC and switch
- Create VLAN
- Ping each other
- Set VTP domain with your first name
- Set VTP password with your family name
- Demonstrate VTP packets 12
Router configuration - set descriptions on interfaces, one with your name, second with your family name, third with your middle name
- display information about directly connected devices to router
- Setup IP addresses for each interfaces
- What is the subnet mask did you use?
- Ping all 3 routers. 10
Demonstration Demonstrate switch and router configuration in week 11 laboratory class 16
Troubleshooting steps Write on problems occurred and how did you troubleshoot. 6
Total 50

Marking Rubrics
Grades Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory
Detailed Network Design in Netsim Demonstrated excellent ability to think critically and sourced reference material appropriately Demonstrated excellent ability to think critically but did not source reference material appropriately Demonstrated ability to think critically and sourced reference material appropriately Demonstrated ability to think critically and did not source reference material appropriately Did not demonstrate ability to think critically and did not source reference material appropriately
Switch configuration Logic is clear and easy to follow with strong arguments Consistency logical and convincing Mostly consistent logical and convincing Adequate cohesion and conviction Argument is confused and disjointed
Router configuration Logic is clear and easy to follow with strong arguments Consistency logical and convincing Mostly consistent logical and convincing Adequate cohesion and conviction Argument is confused and disjointed
Troubleshooting steps All elements are present and very well integrated. Components present with good cohesive Components present and mostly well integrated Most components present Proposal lacks structure.
Demonstration Logic is clear and easy to follow with strong arguments Consistency logical and convincing Mostly consistent logical and convincing Adequate cohesion and conviction Argument is confused and disjointed
IEEE Reference style Clear styles with excellent source of references. Clear referencing style Generally good referencing style Sometimes clear referencing style Lacks consistency with many errors