I agree with Chris, but I'm surprised that, as yet, no one has looked at the reason for sub-netting. Just 'because it exists' is a bad reason. A good reason is where discernible groups need access to peculiar resources. These could be: a) A particular server/servers (could be special mail/file-print/proxy servers for the group of machines on the sub-net). b) Specific network printers. c) Other special shared network resources (web-cam; PLC control technologies(!!); robots; turtles etc etc). By sub-netting and locating the identified resources on the appropriate sub-net, then access is made very easy for those who share that sub-net, but not necessarily denied to less frequent users who may live on another one. In this way, each sub-net can concern itself with the resources which are *predominantly* for its users, and in a way which is commensurate with this, the network traffic is *generally* limited to those switches / routers (depending upon the methodology used on your physical network) that deal with the identified sub-net. By planning network resources around places of need, essential sub-net divisions should really present themselves. It is these that then become 'categorically' good things. Hope this helps further. Andrew
The use of subnets is categorically a good thing; this prevents broadcast traffic from slowing the network down and is a useful way of providing QoS - the downside is lag between subnets if you use a router rather than layer 3 switching. You also need to provide services to resolve netbios names e.g. WINS, and have a method of providing DHCP support.
We use layer 3 to support 20+ class C and below subnets without any issues (W95/8,NT, 2000, XP, Linux, Unix). What concerns do you have on his behalf?
Chris
-----Original Message----- From: Grainge, Derek To: suse-linux-uk-schools@suse.com Sent: 9/15/03 9:47 AM Subject: [suse-linux-uk-schools] address ranges
A colleague (a real colleague not me pretending!) has a network which has grown like topsy. It consists of 8 class C addresses covering 192.168.0.0 - 192.168.7.255 He's operating a mixture of platforms including the odd linux server but a number of W2000 ones.
I think he should take the time and trouble to use a single class B range instead. Can any network guru tell me - is it a) necessary or b) desirable?
Thanks in advance, Derek
-- ************************************************************************ ******** All mail sent and received may be examined to prevent transmission of unacceptable material. Wellington College does not accept responsibility for email contents. Problems to postmaster@wellington-college.berks.sch.uk. Website: http://www.wellington-college.berks.sch.uk ************************************************************************ ********
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: suse-linux-uk-schools-unsubscribe@suse.com For additional commands, e-mail: suse-linux-uk-schools-help@suse.com
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: suse-linux-uk-schools-unsubscribe@suse.com For additional commands, e-mail: suse-linux-uk-schools-help@suse.com
-- Email: aray@computerpark.co.uk --------------------------------------------------------- This private and confidential e-mail has been sent to you by Computer Park Ltd. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail and have received it in error, please notify us via the email address or telephone number below, and then delete it from your mailbox. Email: mailbox@computerpark.co.uk Tel: +44 (0) 1536 417155 Fax: +44 (0) 1536 417566 Head Office: Computer Park Ltd, Broughton Grange, Headlands, Kettering Northamptonshire NN15 6XA Registered in England: 3022961. Registered Office: 6 North Street, Oundle, Peterborough PE8 4AL =========================================================