Have I done my subnetting correctly

Please may someone check to see if I have answer this question correctly

There is a total of six LANs on the system, shown in Figure 1, and each will have three VLANs, making a total of 18 systems. You have been issued 150.75.0.0/16 and your task is to create a subnet scheme that will issue subnets 0 to 17 to each of the VLANs in each LAN in turn. You must provide a table that lists:

WAN links from site to site, identify the last subnet that is to be VLSM’d (this is the
broadcast subnet). Using the last subnet, provide a VLSM structure that can allow for the six addresses required to connect each LAN to the TEST Central Switch as well as the two needed for

Find more posts tagged with

Save $250 on 2025 certification boot camps from Infosec!

Book now with code EOY2025

Button

Comments

Xenz

Your question seems incomplete. Your addressing looks fine for the 150.75.0.0/16 network using a /21 or 255.255.248.0 mask for the subnets. Your P2P addresses are fine.

thomas130

Yeah I took some of the question out because this is for uni and was'nt sure if it would be class as cheating if they saw a post asking someone to check my answer

Thank you for looking

billscott92787

In this example I'm assuming based on the information that again there are 6 LANS, meaning 6 different subnets. Separated by 3 different VLANS, for a total of 18 subnets. It appears you would have to be using a /21 mask based on your subnets because 256-8 = 248 or /21.

Which means that from the default network address you borrowed 5 bits. 2^5-2 = 32-2 = 30. Which means that you can support the 18 hosts. 4 bits will not work. So, I would say that you did your subnetting properly Because /21 supports this requirement. This means each subnet would increment by .8, which it appears you did right. Good job

I do not think the WAN links are right though. When I look at them, it looks like you ended with the 150.75.136.0 address for your last subnet which goes to 150.75.143.255, so how could you assign this address space to a WAN link? Wouldn't the next subnet start at 150.75.144.0, and then you would break the WAN links down from there?