Clients/SSLOCSD/slack/2026/02/2026-02-26_south-county.md

# #south-county — 2026-02-26 **09:01 [Mason Radke](https://slack.com/archives/C08G4KZG7D5/p1772125290696999):** just a note to my future self.. when connecting to the EWS server using RUT be sure to set the authentication method manually to single password. **11:06 [Kevin](https://slack.com/archives/C08G4KZG7D5/p1772132768177579):** [[F0AHAG9RER3_config_cp4000.ini]] **11:33 [Kevin](https://slack.com/archives/C08G4KZG7D5/p1772134400110579):** [[F0AJ8D633NU_CP4000_Network.pdf]] **12:03 [Mason Radke](https://slack.com/archives/C08G4KZG7D5/p1772136189370569):** here is our final CP4000 isolation plan [[F0AHT92614H_ICS_Network_Segmentation_Plan_FINAL.pdf]] **15:58 [Kevin](https://slack.com/archives/C08G4KZG7D5/p1772150305679539):** @Mason Radke is this the final? **15:58 [Mason Radke](https://slack.com/archives/C08G4KZG7D5/p1772150319000979):** no **15:58 [Kevin](https://slack.com/archives/C08G4KZG7D5/p1772150330363109):** copy **15:59 [Kevin](https://slack.com/archives/C08G4KZG7D5/p1772150393811039):** do you know the plc model? is it a L330? **16:08 [Kevin](https://slack.com/archives/C08G4KZG7D5/p1772150887426749):** I'm talking to Chad. He says those NICs on the PLC are 1GB and should handle 180 connections before even starting to have an issue. **16:08 [Kevin](https://slack.com/archives/C08G4KZG7D5/p1772150915472909):** He's leaning toward it is a switch setup problem, which would not surprise me since I did all the setup. **17:05 [Mason Radke](https://slack.com/archives/C08G4KZG7D5/p1772154347118749):** L330ER **17:05 [Mason Radke](https://slack.com/archives/C08G4KZG7D5/p1772154353644729):** sorry was on a call **17:06 [Mason Radke](https://slack.com/archives/C08G4KZG7D5/p1772154383726509):** i agree. i dont think its a throughput issue.. **17:06 [Mason Radke](https://slack.com/archives/C08G4KZG7D5/p1772154385684129):** something else **17:07 [Mason Radke](https://slack.com/archives/C08G4KZG7D5/p1772154461798389):** broadcast storm? cip messages? just sheer quantity, not necessarly throughput? i dont know.. would probably be good to get him involved.. **17:17 [Mason Radke](https://slack.com/archives/C08G4KZG7D5/p1772155033859889):** so it sounds like we can stick with our original plan but use the port based VLAN tagging to achieve the same thing. **17:17 [Kevin](https://slack.com/archives/C08G4KZG7D5/p1772155076890229):** oh? **17:28 [Mason Radke](https://slack.com/archives/C08G4KZG7D5/p1772155695745079):** [[F0AHG6KMQ7L_ICS_Network_Segmentation_Plan_Rev3.2_FINAL.pdf]] **17:28 [Mason Radke](https://slack.com/archives/C08G4KZG7D5/p1772155707286309):** V3.2 **17:33 [Mason Radke](https://slack.com/archives/C08G4KZG7D5/p1772156002374519):** @Kevin This document feels good, you could share it to chad to see what he thinks. this would implement the isolation using port based VLANs **17:33 [Mason Radke](https://slack.com/archives/C08G4KZG7D5/p1772156038898399):** there could very likely be other issues.. but if we wanted to isolate the traffic, this would work. **18:50 [Kevin](https://slack.com/archives/C08G4KZG7D5/p1772160637944949):** Thank you! I will share it with Chad. **18:51 [Mason Radke](https://slack.com/archives/C08G4KZG7D5/p1772160674247209):** It’s excessively thorough **18:51 [Mason Radke](https://slack.com/archives/C08G4KZG7D5/p1772160681886609):** But I like it