"guzzi" <guzzi@_DOT_yandex.ru> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> 10.0.0.0 - workstations
> 10.1.0.0 - servers
> 10.2.0.0 - network devices (switch,hub,network printer...)
> 10.3.0.0 - 1st dmz
> 10.4.0.0 - 2nd dmz
No.
1. There are too many (potential) hosts per subnet.
2. There is no point in breaking it up like that. You are creating
needless
complexity that has no point to it and will most likely be cause you
problems.
3. There is almost never an need for a second DMZ, and there are even
quite few *real* needs for even 1 DMZ to start with.
4. You are wasting IP#s like there is no tomorrow
The purpose of segmenting is two things:
1. Protect agains excessive broadcast.
2. Security enhancement by providing ALCs onthe routers between
segments.
You can't possibly have #1 unless there are more than 250-300 hosts on
segment.
I can see no real reason for #2 either at this point. Real security does not
require it.
Proper Application security and proper NTFS secuity pretty much negate the
need
for ACLs between subnets. ACLs between subnets are the last method you would
use
and they are the least granular and the least flexable.
Try this, all one subnet:
(Avoid heavily over-used IP Ranges)
10.1.10.0 -- 10.1.10.255
10.1.10.1 - Internet Sharing Device
10.1.10.2-10.1.10.20 - Servers, Hubs, Switches, Printers, etc.
10.1.10.21-10.1.10.50 - Statically assigned workstations
10.1.10.51-10.1.10.225 - DHCP Assign hosts
10.1.10.226-10.1.10.254 - Any left over Statically assigned devices
DHCP Scope:
Scope Full Range 10.1.10.1-10.1.10.254
Exclusions: 10.1.10.1-10.1.10.50
10.1.10.226-10.1.10.254
Active range: 10.1.10.51-10.1.10.225
Router: 10.1.10.1
DNS: <server IP#>
WINS: <server IP#>
If you have more than 254 hosts total then add a LAN Router and another
subnet. The above does *not* change other than you add another Scope to the
DHCP (following the same pattern) for the new subnet.
--
Phillip Windell [MCP, MVP, CCNA]
www.wandtv.com