Convincing Features
Assignment Type
Subject
Uploaded by Malaysia Assignment Help
Date
This group assignment carries 50% of your total module assessment marks (40% for the report and 10% for the presentation). The total word count of the report should not exceed 5000 words. No marks will be awarded for the entire assignment if any part of it is found to be copied directly from printed materials or from another student. All submissions should be made on or before the due date. Any late submissions after the deadline will not be entertained. Zero (0) mark will be awarded for late submission unless extenuating circumstances are upheld. Maximum of 7 students in a group.
Cloud Co is a networking company that has planned to upgrade its IT services in their existing locations i.e., in KL (HQ) and Australia and Singapore (Remote Branch). The network administrator in Australia and Singapore has planned to replace the current configuration with a new VLAN design to make the network more efficient and to enhance the security of the network especially in HQ branch located in KL. For the Australia network, the network administrator has planned to deploy WLC WLAN to ease the configuration of the Wireless network and its access.
The company may be characterised by its departments. The names and locations of these departments are as follows:
As a newly appointed network executive, you have been asked to work on the design and prototype of the new network. You need to create the logical topology and configure all devices using Cisco Packet Tracer as the simulator to evaluate the design. Students need to use their creativity to design the topology that contains all the following requirements stated below.
There are some requirements in the above scenario that must be considered in this design.
Implement DHCPv4 to operate across multiple LANs. .
Each GROUP is required to provide a report to justify the network topology and IP address used in the network plan. A written report should be completed based on the network design and configurations implemented in the Cisco Packet Tracer. Below are the proposed guidelines for the report:
Document the results of your work in a professional and systematic manner, in the form of a computerized report. Your completed documentation should meet the following requirements:
The report is to be written in a professional manner, paying due regard to the following aspects:
Students are required to hand in their assignment (softcopy only) on time to the Online Submission System (Moodle – Turnitin Assignment). Only group leader or one of the group members will do the submission. In addition, demo / presentation of the network design will be scheduled for all students before submission date by group.
https://apiit.atlassian.net/servicedesk/customer/portal/4/article/1117945857?src=668985563
The submission includes:
CLO2: Propose suitable concepts in switching, routing and WLAN implementation together with Layer 2 security best practices based on the given scenario (A3, PLO6) |
||||||
|
Marking Criteria |
0-2 (Fail) |
3-4 (Marginal Fail) |
5-6 (Pass) |
7-8 (Credit) |
9-10 (Distinction) |
Marks Awarded |
| Topology Design
(10%) |
Not submitting packet tracer diagram / no design.
|
Able to produce network design, but major requirements stated are not fulfilled. | Able to produce good network design, but minor requirements stated are not fulfilled. | Able to produce complete network design following all requirements. | Able to produce complete network design following all requirements with some complexities in the design. | |
| IP Addressing plan
(10%) |
Wrong IP addressing were provided
(Not feasible).
|
Inadequate proposal of the IP addressing plan. | The IP addressing plan is clearly written, with correct calculations.
|
The IP addressing plan is comprehensive
|
The IP addressing plan has good justification and critical discussion with supporting evidence. | |
| LAN and WAN Configuration Techniques
(10%)
|
LAN and WAN Configuration not clear.
No configuration found. |
Incomplete LAN and WAN configuration.
Major issues in configuration (some parts are unable to ping).
|
Feasible LAN and WAN configuration with minimum requirement for the selected technique.
Minimal issues in configuration – not fully working according to the network design.
|
Feasible LAN and WAN configuration to demonstrate the selected technique
Successful LAN and WAN configuration (able to ping to all devices). |
Good quality / complexity of LAN and WAN configuration. Extra effort shown to create a good design.
Successful LAN and WAN configuration (able to ping to all devices).
|
|
| Proposed WLAN Architecture and Configuration
(10%)
|
Poor proposal on WLAN architecture were provided
(Not feasible).
|
Inadequate justification on the WLAN architecture and its security mechanisms | The justification on the proposed WLAN architecture and its security mechanisms are clearly written
|
The justification on the proposed WLAN architecture and its security mechanisms are comprehensive, with sufficient rationalizations.
|
The justification on the proposed WLAN architecture and its security mechanisms has good rationalizations and critical discussion
|
|
|
Marking Criteria |
0-4 (Fail) |
5-8 (Marginal Fail) |
9-12 (Pass) |
13-16 (Credit) |
17-20 (Distinction) |
Marks Awarded |
| EtherChannel/HSRP Configuration (20%) | Not able to demonstrate
ability to perform configurations as required for EtherChannel and HSRP. |
Most of the required configurations for EtherChannel and HSRP are not fulfilled or has lots of errors. | Some of the required configurations in EtherChannel and HSRP are not fulfilled or with minimal errors. | All the required configurations in EtherChannel/HSRP are completed without errors. | All the required configurations in EtherChannel/HSRP are completed, with some complexities in the design. | |
|
Marking Criteria |
0-2
(Fail) |
3-4
(Marginal Fail) |
5-6
(Pass) |
7-8
(Credit) |
9-10 (Distinction) |
Marks Awarded |
| Layer 2 Security Threats and Mechanisms Deployment in configuration
(10%)
|
Layer 2 security mechanisms implemented is not clear.
None or only one mechanism deployed. (Not feasible).
|
Feasible layer 2 security mechanisms implemented, meeting the minimum requirement of a network.
|
Good layer 2 security mechanisms implemented, showing complete coverage on the security setting of the network
Satisfactory number of relevant mechanisms provided in the network plan. |
Good quality / complexity of layer 2 security mechanisms implemented.
Good number of relevant mechanisms provided in the network plan |
Excellent quality / complexity of layer 2 security mechanisms implemented.
Very good choice of relevant mechanisms good justification for the diagrams with citation (if needed)
|
|
| Recommendations
(10%) |
Poor research and investigation of the problem. Poor and insufficient recommendations of the requirement
|
Inadequate research and investigation of the problem. Poor recommendations of the requirement. | Well research and investigation are done. Good 3 recommendation of the requirements with proper reasoning with proper evidence. | Very well analysis and investigation of the problem. Exceptional 3 recommendations of the requirements with proper evidence. | Excellent analysis and investigation of the problem. Outstanding 3 recommendations of the requirements with proper reasoning and evidence. | |
| Referencing
(10%) |
No in-text citation and very minimal references. Major issues in the referencing format.
Referencing was done manually, without using Microsoft Word features. |
Minimal in-text citation and references used. Minor issues in the referencing format.
Not able to fully utilize the referencing features in Microsoft Word. |
Sufficient number of references and citation in the report. No issue in the referencing format
Able to fully utilize the referencing features in Microsoft Word. |
Recent source of references used, with proper reference list. Limited in-text citation in the report
Good utilization of the referencing features in Microsoft Word. |
Very good quality of references used, with proper citation and reference list for all facts and diagrams used
Proficient in using the referencing features in Microsoft Word. |
|
|
Individual Contribution (10%)
|
Content is minimal or absent, lacking in originality and relevance. Ideas are unclear, disorganized, or irrelevant to the report’s objectives. Shows little to no engagement in the report’s development, contributing minimally. | Content is superficial, lacking in originality or depth. Ideas are present but may be disorganized or poorly aligned with objectives.
Involvement in the report is minimal, with significant dependence on others. |
Content is informative but may lack depth or originality. Ideas are clear but could benefit from better organization or alignment with objectives. Participates actively but may rely on others for significant parts of the report. | Content is original, well-researched, and informative. Ideas are well-organized and align well with the report’s objectives. Shows initiative and plays a significant role in shaping the report. | Content is highly original, well-researched, and provides deep insights. Ideas are clearly articulated, well-organized, and effectively support the report’s objectives. Demonstrates leadership in the report’s development by guiding the structure and flow. | |
| CLO3: Present configuration strategies for routers, switches and WLCs to mitigate LAN attacks using appropriate simulation tool (A2, PLO5)
|
||||||
|
Marking Criteria |
0-4
(Fail) |
5-8
(Marginal Fail) |
9-12
(Pass) |
13-16
(Credit) |
17-20
(Distinction) |
Marks Awarded |
| Topology Design
(20%)
|
Limited understanding of network topologies and unable to select appropriate topology for given scenario.
|
Basic understanding of network topologies and can select appropriate topology for simple scenarios.
|
Acceptable understanding of network topologies and can select appropriate topology for most scenarios.
|
Good understanding of network topologies and can select appropriate topology for most scenarios. | Excellent understanding of network topologies and can select appropriate topology for complex scenarios. |
|
| Protocol Implementation
(20%)
|
Limited ability to implement and configure network protocols. | Basic ability to implement and configure network protocols for simple scenarios. | Acceptable ability to implement and configure network protocols for most scenarios. | Good ability to implement and configure network protocols for most scenarios. | Excellent ability to implement and configure network protocols for complex scenarios. | |
| Security Measures
(20%) |
Limited understanding of security measures and unable to implement them effectively. | Basic understanding of security measures and can implement them effectively for simple scenarios. | Acceptable understanding of security measures and can implement them effectively for most scenarios. | Good understanding of security measures and can implement them effectively for most scenarios. | Excellent understanding of security measures and can implement them effectively for complex scenarios. | |
| Utilization of tools for network design
(20%)
|
Hardly able to use packet tracer simulation tool in providing network design. | Basic ability to use packet tracer simulation tool providing network design. | Satisfactory use of packet tracer simulation tool providing network design. | Good use of packet tracer simulation tool providing network design. | Excellent use of packet tracer simulation tool providing network design. | |
| Video Submission- content
(20%)
|
Not submitting for project demonstration.
Poor understanding on the configuration.
|
Able to show minimal understanding on the configuration done
|
Show good understanding in configuration but can be improved in technical and IP addressing scheme knowledge.
Not very good in explaining technical configuration and average verification commands. |
Very good understanding in configuration and IP addressing scheme deployed.
Able to explain technical configuration and good verification commands. |
Outstanding configuration skills demonstrated, exceeding the expectation.
Able to explain technical configuration and excellent verification commands.
|
|
|
Total Marks |
/100 |
|||||
Final Marks Calculation
| A | B | C | |
| Group Report (40%) | Individual Presentation (10%) | Grand Total (50%) | Final Assignment Marks (100%) |
| X / 100 | X / 100 | A + B | (C)/50 * 100 |
