Uncommon private ip addressing schemes!

maumercadomaumercado Member Posts: 163
Reason Im asking this is that the company I worked for has tell me to redo the addressing scheme since they have had too much troubles dealing with host to host VPNs because the ip addressing scheme used here is way too common is a class C x.x.1.x so they want to change it...

We have about 50 users, so I was thinking of getting something like a class B address with /25 mask like 172.16.20.0/25

That would be about right or should I choose another ip addressing scheme?

Comments

  • stlsmoorestlsmoore Member Posts: 515 ■■■□□□□□□□
    What about 192.168.2.x, 192.168.0.0-192.168.255.255 is the entire private IP range for class C type of networks.
    My Cisco Blog Adventure: http://shawnmoorecisco.blogspot.com/

    Don't Forget to Add me on LinkedIn!
    https://www.linkedin.com/in/shawnrmoore
  • Paul BozPaul Boz Member Posts: 2,621 ■■■■■■■■□□
    Just don't use public addressing in your private lan... I visit or at least see 10-20 corporate / enterprise networks every month and a good 2-3 of them use public addressing internally.

    I typically use the class A range with granular class C networks. For example, I will put servers on a 10.0.50.0/24 subnet, printers / scanners on a 10.0.55.0/24 subnet, branch locations on their own 10.x.x.x/24 networks, etc. You will never run out of class A addressing so you can be very "loose" with IP allocations. I never use less than a /24 because there really isn't a point when you have 16,000,000 addresses available.
    CCNP | CCIP | CCDP | CCNA, CCDA
    CCNA Security | GSEC |GCFW | GCIH | GCIA
    [email protected]
    http://twitter.com/paul_bosworth
    Blog: http://www.infosiege.net/
  • benbuiltpcbenbuiltpc Member Posts: 80 ■■□□□□□□□□
    We use a 172.25.x.x / 23 which has worked nicely over the years.

    However using 10.x.x.x is a good idea for most any LAN, as long as your NAT device permits it.
Sign In or Register to comment.