[itdiscuss] Private IP Addressing

Jon Barton jon at soundmind.cc
Mon Apr 30 15:15:43 EDT 2012


Mike,

 

Change your mask to  255.255.254.0  or (/23) and it gets you 510 hosts per
subnet.

 

i.e. 172.16.0.1/23 or mask= 255.255.254.0  yields a useable range
172.16.0.1-172.16.1.254

 

172.168.1.0 is a public network .I'm unclear on what you have now, but you
should stick to an address defined in "RFC 1918" 

 

 

Jon Barton

Principal Consultant

Soundmind Network Solutions, LLC

office 770-594-7147

mobile 770-841-1022

jon at soundmind.cc

http://www.linkedin.com/in/jonbartonjr

Celebrating 10 years in business, offering World Class Network Engineering
Services!

 

 

From: Mike Hazelwood [mailto:mhazelwood at gracechurchsc.org] 
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2012 2:58 PM
To: discuss at itdiscuss.org
Subject: [itdiscuss] Private IP Addressing

 

We are needing to have more than the standard 252 IP addresses that a
standard private Class C IP provides with everyone now having 2-3 devices
per person, and guests coming onsite as well.  I have only dealt with
smaller networks for the most part that had a single subnet and private
Class C address.  I have 2 questions and can't find a good answer on the
Internet so hoping you guys can help out.

 

1.  Can I change the mask to 255.255.0.0 on a Class C and get more hosts
(basically same number of hosts as a private Class B)?  I don't think I can,
but haven't found anything either way on Google.

 

2.  If I can't just change subnet mask, and move to 172.16.1.0 network
address:

 

If I reserve 172.168.1.0 network for static IPs (servers, switches, etc.)
and setup DHCP to start handing out IP address at 172.168.2.1 to
172.168.5.254, will this be considered one subnet and traffic will route on
this network on Layer 2 switches without the need for Layer 3 switches or
VLans?  

 

Trying to keep it as simple as possible.

 

Thanks,

Mike

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://optimus.thompsonic.com/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20120430/10bbf695/attachment.html>


More information about the discuss mailing list