We use a 10. addresses, and separate information based on the IP.

For example: 10.20.103.250
That can be read as: 10.High School.Room 103.Printer 1
Or: 10.Building.Room.Device

We have all of our addresses statically assigned in DHCP, so we can keep this 
kind of address logic. For example, we always use IP address ending in 250-254 
for printers in the room. 

Obviously there are flaws with this system. I can't correctly use room 402, for 
example. Also, when somebody moves a computer around without our knowing, the 
IP address no longer is useful.

Another method we use when a networkable item has no home is 10.99.xxx.xxx. I 
this case, the 99 means this item's IP is based on it's inventory tag/barcode. 
For example, if the IP address was assigned to 10.99.45.23, I would know that 
this is tagged with barcode 4523. I then use my inventory to look up further 
information on the device. This would be valid up to Barcode 25599 
(10.99.255.99), which is enough for us for some time.


--Matt Ross
Ephrata School District


----- Original Message -----
From: Ben Schorr
[mailto:[email protected]]
To: NT System Admin Issues
[mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thu, 17 Dec 2009
13:16:54 -0800
Subject: RE: Need more IP addresses


> We actually have one client with a Class B (255.255.0.0) network and I
> have to say...we really like it.  Gives us a LOT of flexibility in our
> addressing.  172.23.x.x is their scheme.  172.23.1.x are servers,
> 172.23.2.x, 172.23.22.x and 172.23.222.x are workstations served up by
> their DHCP servers.  172.23.3.x are printers and other network attached
> devices, etc..
> 
>  
> 
> Of course, that network was set up that way from the beginning.  I'm not
> sure I'd want to have to go back thru and readdress everything that way
> on an existing network, but I'd think about it at least.
> 
>  
> 
> Ben M. Schorr
> Chief Executive Officer
> ______________________________________________
> Roland Schorr & Tower
> www.rolandschorr.com <http://www.rolandschorr.com/> 
> [email protected]
> 
>  
> 
> From: Jeff Johnson [mailto:[email protected]] 
> Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2009 11:15 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Need more IP addresses
> 
>  
> 
> I thought about that, but then I also thought that opening a network
> that large would cause other problems.
> 
>  
> 
> The following is a good approximation of my network.   All are located
> in one building with future expansion to across the parking lot in 5+
> years.
> 
>  
> 
> 175 DHCP assigned PC's
> 
> 15 Static ip PC's
> 
> 10 Servers with Static IP's
> 
> 12 Printers with static IP's
> 
> 15 Network devices (switches/AP's) with reserved addresses.
> 
> 20 Static IP "Other" devices 
> 
>  
> 
> Jeff Johnson
> 
> Systems Administrator
> 
> 714-773-2600 Office
> 
> 714-773-6351 Fax
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> From: John Aldrich [mailto:[email protected]] 
> Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2009 1:05 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Need more IP addresses
> 
>  
> 
> Why not just change your netmask to 255.255.0.0? That should be more IPs
> than you will EVER use! J
> 
>  
> 
>   
> 
>  
> 
> From: Jeff Johnson [mailto:[email protected]] 
> Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2009 3:49 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Need more IP addresses
> 
>  
> 
> 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
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~

Reply via email to