Network Designing

struthio · 2010-12-07 13:50:10

Hello,

I have question about some kind of 'bigger' network configuration than default 192.168.1.x one.

I think about dividing my home network in few IP pool, thanks to that I could easily manage them, and know from what medium a connection was made.
All devices that I use will have static addresses (assigned by DHCP), everyone else will receive dynamic one.

I thought about something like:

192.168.1.x – Statically assigned IP for LAN devices (connected by wire)
192.168.2.x – Statically assigned IP for WLAN devices (ex. cell phones, PC, etc.)
192.168.3.x – Dynamically assigned IP for LAN/WLAN devices which do not have static addresses (for GUEST users)

I would like also to have full communication between all networks (LAN/WLAN/GUEST), but ex. guest network will be forbidden to access Internet.

Do this configuration have any 'future' ?
Is it better to create three separate networks with mask 255.255.255.0 or maybe one with 255.255.0.0. ?
How it is with performance of such solutions ?

fukawi2 · 2010-12-07 22:31:32

struthio wrote:

Is it better to create three separate networks with mask 255.255.255.0 or maybe one with 255.255.0.0. ?

From a security PoV, create them as separate networks -- but if you're running them on the same Layer 2, then that is redundant.

struthio wrote:

How it is with performance of such solutions ?

In a small network, it's probably negligible depending. In larger networks, it limits the broadcast domain scope so few broadcasts are hitting each client (only the broadcasts from it's own network).

cactus · 2010-12-07 22:35:03

Generally speaking if you have a broadcast domain larger than 250 or so hosts, you will have significant broadcast traffic (especially if they are noisy windows or macs -- WINS/bonjour/etc).

I generally don't make leaf networks larger than a /24 for that reason -- though smaller is ok (note I said leaf networks, for routing purposes superneting subnets or chopping into larger pieces is perfectly fine).

So I would recommend using 3 separate /24 networks, yes.

Note: if you are going to provide vpn servers, I usually would recommend choosing something other than the typical 192.168.0.0/16 private netblock. I prefer to subnet within 172.16.0.0/12 networks personally, because very few home users or free-wifi will utilize anything in that netblock (most people don't even realize they exist!).

http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1918.html

10.0.0.0 - 10.255.255.255 (10/8 prefix)
172.16.0.0 - 172.31.255.255 (172.16/12 prefix)
192.168.0.0 - 192.168.255.255 (192.168/16 prefix)

struthio · 2011-02-19 21:51:55

By reading your posts I decided to go with 3 networks and it work fine.

Thanks!

Now I have another problem, I would appreciate if you will help me.

https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php … 65#p894065

Arch Linux

#1 2010-12-07 13:50:10

Network Designing

#2 2010-12-07 22:31:32

Re: Network Designing

#3 2010-12-07 22:35:03

Re: Network Designing

#4 2011-02-19 21:51:55

Re: Network Designing

Board footer