Extending the Warehouse Network Without Breaking It
A wholesale distributor operates a warehouse with 40 handheld barcode scanners on Wi-Fi, a warehouse management system (WMS) on a local server, and an office network of 25 desktop PCs. The two networks are currently joined by a single unmanaged switch, so office PCs and scanners share one flat network. The distributor is adding a second warehouse 400 m away and wants the scanners there to use the same WMS. The IT manager proposes running one fibre link between the buildings and putting the new warehouse on the same flat network, arguing it is "simplest and cheapest". A security review noted that any device on the flat network can reach the WMS server directly, and that a misconfigured scanner could disrupt office traffic. Warehouse staff report scanners dropping off Wi-Fi near the loading dock.
1. Evaluate the IT manager's proposal and recommend a network design. Explain how your design addresses the observed symptoms.
Read the worked answer
The proposal solves reachability but not the real problems. Extending the flat network 400 m over fibre keeps every device in one broadcast domain, so the security finding gets worse: scanners and office PCs would still be able to reach the WMS server directly, and a fault or broadcast storm in either building could affect the other. It also does nothing for the loading-dock Wi-Fi drops, which are a coverage problem, not a routing problem.
A better design uses the fibre link but segments the network: separate VLANs for scanners, office PCs and servers, with routing and access rules between them so scanners can reach only the WMS service they need and office PCs cannot reach warehouse devices. The WMS server sits in its own segment with restricted access. The loading-dock drops should be investigated as a wireless issue: signal survey, additional access points or directional antennas at the dock, and checking for interference from metal racking and forklifts. Roaming between access points should be configured so scanners associate cleanly as they move.
The design still uses the single fibre link, so it remains a single point of failure between buildings; the distributor should decide whether that risk is acceptable or whether a second diverse path is warranted. The recommendation is therefore: keep the fibre, add segmentation and access control, and fix Wi-Fi coverage at the dock.
2. The distributor asks whether to keep the WMS on the local server or move it to a hosted service now that there are two sites. What factors should drive that decision?
Read the worked answer
The decision hinges on where the data and processing need to be and how tolerant the business is of downtime. A locally hosted WMS keeps latency low for 40 scanners doing rapid barcode transactions, but it ties availability to the warehouse server and the link between buildings; if the fibre fails, the second warehouse loses the WMS. A hosted WMS removes the site dependency and centralises updates and backups, but makes both warehouses dependent on the internet link, so the quality and redundancy of that link become critical.
Factors to weigh include: the acceptable downtime for scanning operations (if scanners stop, picking stops), the reliability and redundancy of internet connectivity at both sites, the cost of hosting versus refreshing the local server, data sovereignty and privacy obligations for supplier and customer data, and the effort to migrate. A defensible approach is to choose based on measured tolerance: if a link outage would halt the second warehouse, either provide a redundant internet path for a hosted WMS or keep the WMS local with a resilient inter-building link. The answer is not "cloud is better"; it is that whichever option is chosen must have its single point of failure identified and mitigated.