IP range usage question 4

[gman10]

Hello all-

I hope this is the right forum for this question, if not I'll post it where necessary.

Well, here goes:

I'm trying to work out the right IP scheme/CLASS for a 3 site assessment.
There are 3 buildings. each will have 500 users (total 1500 users) all will need a PC so all must have individual IP addresses and each building should be in different subnets (unless there's a better way, I've been told for management purposes 3 different subnets makes sense) anyway..
My question, what is the right CLASS/range to use for this scenario? I'm thinking maybe a CLASS "A" ie.

10.10.1.1-10.10.1.500/24 SITE 1
10.10.2.1-10.10.2.500/24 SITE 2
10.10.3.1-10.10.3.500/24 SITE 3

Would this do it? just curious ..

Thanks everyone for all the massive support!

gman

 

[buddafish]

yep, no TCP traffic from ANY host , destined for 172.16.x.x on port 23 (telnet) will be allowed ... and log all attempts ...

yes.. log is just that... logging... which can be pushed out to a syslog server for greater detail and parsing, ect...

scottie

 

[gman10]

Thanks so much Scottie

 

[gman10]

Buddafish,

Morning.. was just thinking about logfiles. What can logfiles essentially tell me? Can I make a logfile tell me if someone has been trying to logon using the "enabled" password but failed? would it be able to collect this info and show me in plain text exactly what password they were trying to use even though it wasn't successful or is this asking too much from as far as logging functionality.

thanks for all the info I appreciate it.

gman

 

[lgarner]

Personally, I'd just use 10.x addresses for all 3 sites.

10.1.0.0/16 site A
10.2.0.0/16 site B
10.3.0.0/16 site C

Plenty of addresses, little calculation needed, and plenty of subnets for each site if you like. You can immediately spot which site is associated with a given address.

I used 10.1.0.0 for our main site, and 10.1.1.0 for administration, 10.1.2.0 for the trading systems, 10.1.3.0 for servers, you get the idea.

 

[martyh]

The other thng you might want to consider in your network is where the servers are; who is handing out the IP addresses; what kind of routers you will use and whether you will share resources (unless you route the packets a computer on 172.16.0.x wil not see a printer on 172.16.1.X). Also the bandwidth is vital (100 or 1000).

If they all go back to one router/core switch and you have a gigabit core you could supernet which would eliminate routing and increase throughput. e.g. 172.16.0.0 with 255.255.248.0 would give you over 2000 hosts (172.16.0.1 to 172.16.7.254) with no need to route internally.

Just a thought.

Marty
Network Admin
Hilliard Schools

 

[gman10]

Thanks everyone,

Truly very useful information! Enjoy the whats left of the weekend although I had a work afew hrs.. ugh!

gman

 

[Albion]

Sounds like a perfect situation to implement IPv6 instead of IPv4.

-Al