Well, given your minimum host requirements, this will be difficult. Location A will need at least 2 subnets, as the need for 160 hosts in one block can only be met by a /24 or shorter mask and you only have a /24 allocation. If you give Loc. A a /25 and a /27, that would only be 126+30=156 hosts, so it would have to use a /25 and /26 for 126+62=188 hosts. Loc. B would have to use a /27 for 30 hosts (a /28 would only give 14 hosts). That leaves Loc. C, which needs 48 hosts. Given the above netmasks, all we have left is a /27 for 30 hosts. If the numbers you list below are for actual hosts (not netblocks including net address and broadcast address), you cannot do it with your class C. Even if you do more VLSM on the /26 for Loc. A, it will still fall short. Also, even if you hedge your numbers and make it fit into the one /24, you will basically have zero room for growth. I would suggest either obtaining another /24+ allocation or *groan* bridging. Alternatively, you could explore NAT, either at Loc. A for all 3 sites, or individually at Loc. B + C.
Andrew ""Howard C. Berkowitz"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > >Can anyone help ! > >I have been assigned by our Head Office a Class B address > >(Let's say 172.133.205.0) with a subnet mask of 255.255.255.0 > >which gives me 254 hosts available. > > > > >However i have to split this between 3 locations > >like so : > > > >Loc A : Minimum Addresses Required 160 (HQ) > >Loc B : Minumum Addresses Required 16 > >Loc C : Minumum Addresses Required 48 > > > >Loc B & C will each have a router that connects to a router at Loc A. > > > >Any ideas on how this can done ? > > > VLSM and a classless routing protocol. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=27868&t=27808 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
