Yup, 23 would work, I'm bad about overkill. :) - WJR
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 15:06, Carol Fee <[email protected]> wrote: > Why not simply use 192.168.1.0/23 > > > > *CFee* > > *From:* Chris Knieriem [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* Thursday, December 17, 2009 4:01 PM > *To:* Active Directory Admin Issues > *Subject:* [MALWARE FREE]RE: Need more IP addresses > > > > Jeff, > > > > To better answer your question I would like to have some > information on your network topology. For example, you can add additional > subnets such as 192.168.2.0 and 192.168.3.0 with the addition of a router or > two. Do you use DHCP? Are there any remote offices? > > > > If you are using DHCP and add additional subnets you will need to > configure your routers to forward DHCP requests of make available a DHCP > server on each subnet. DHCP requests are sent initially as broadcasts and > therefore do not pass through routers by default. In the old days we used > DHCP relay agents on out NT 4 boxes to facilitate DHCP requests or use a > multihomed server (2 NICS with one on each subnet). Whew what memories. > > > > Chris > > > > Chris Knieriem > > Potomac Computer Care > > 920 National Highway > > Cumberland, MD 21502 > > 301-777-3914 > > [email protected] > > > > *From:* Jeff Johnson [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* Thursday, December 17, 2009 3:52 PM > *To:* Active Directory Admin Issues > *Subject:* [MALWARE FREE]Need more IP addresses > > > > **DOUBLE POST** I sent this to the NT System Admin Group too. > > > > I am in need of more IP addresses on my network. > > > > My current network looks like this: > > 192.168.1.x > > 255.255.255.0 > > > > I am using 248 IP’s currently, so I have very little expansion available. > I do see the potential to increase in the following year, so I had better > get my butt thinking about this soon. Plus I have Christmas and New Year’s > holidays that I could work with no one on our network for 3 full days. > > > > I am thinking about changing my subnet to something like 255.255.254.0 or > 255.255.252.0. Would this be a good way, or would I be better adding an > additional router and just creating a new 255.255.255.0 network on > 192.168.2.x? > > > > I guess my question is which is the “correct” way? > > > > *Jeff Johnson* > > *Systems Administrator* > > 714-773-2600 Office > > 714-773-6351 Fax > > [image: hydraflow] > > > > > > > > ~ NEW: CounterSpy Enterprise: Centralized Antispyware - #1 in eWEEK Test! ~ > > ~ ~ > > > No malware was found: NETGEAR ProSecure Web/Email Security Threat > Management Appliance has scanned this mail and its attachment(s). > > ~ NEW: CounterSpy Enterprise: Centralized Antispyware - #1 in eWEEK Test! ~ > > ~ ~ > > > No malware was found: NETGEAR ProSecure Web/Email Security Threat > Management Appliance has scanned this mail and its attachment(s). > > ~ NEW: CounterSpy Enterprise: Centralized Antispyware - #1 in eWEEK Test! ~ > > ~ ~ > > ~ NEW: CounterSpy Enterprise: Centralized Antispyware - #1 in eWEEK Test! ~ > ~ ~ > > ~ NEW: CounterSpy Enterprise: Centralized Antispyware - #1 in eWEEK Test! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/product.cfm?id=400> ~
<<image001.jpg>>
