"Dave Fitton" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:EA741960-69A5-41BD-8AEA-(E-Mail Removed)...
> Our college is shortly to be merged with an other college and the 2 IT
> teams
> are working on a IP addressing scheme that will best fit for a merged
> network
>
> Current setup is:
>
> College A - uses a single 10.1.0.0 /255.255.0.0 class B type subnet on a
> single site - around 900 client PCs - both admin and student PC on same
> subnet
> College B - uses a 10.0.0.0/255.248.0.0 for the student network and
> 172.16.0.0/255.255.0.0 for the admin network. Both these subnets span a
> 100MB
> link between 2 sites - both with around 450 PCs each
>
> We need a scheme that will work for the merged college across 3 sites in
> total
>
> My solution for the merged 3-site college would be to use
>
> 1. Single subnets for each site - eg
> 10.1.0.0 /255.255.0.0 for site 1,
> 10.2.0.0 /255.255.0.0 for site 2,
> 10.3.0.0 /255.255.0.0 for site 3
> 2. 100mb links between the sites
>
> My questions are:
>
> a) Does this look a feasible solution
> b) Is subnetting a Class A network into Class B type subnets the
> recommended/easiest way to subnet a Class A - a subnet mask of 255.252.0.0
> has been suggested
> c) Should all internal clients use the same Network address - in has been
> suggested that 10 range and 172 range be kept
>
> Any suggestions welcomed
>
> Thanks
>
> Dave F
That sounds sensible to me. I can't see any reason to use a subnet mask
shorter than 16 bits. I can't imagine a site outgrowing the capacity of a
10.x.0.0/16 subnet .
I can't see any reason to stay with the 172.16 . On the other hand
there is no real reason to change it if it means a lot of work, but it
would look tidier if they were all 10.x.0.0/16 as you suggest.
How are the machines split up within sites? Surely the 900 odd machines
are not all in the same broadcast domain?
|
Similar Threads
Linear Mode
