Re: need more ip's
From: Preacher Man (SLawson_at_bouldincorp.com)
Date: 02/18/05
- Next message: Preacher Man: "Re: Broadcast"
- Previous message: Herb Martin: "Re: Broadcast"
- In reply to: Vinny Hahn: "need more ip's"
- Next in thread: Phillip Windell: "Re: need more ip's"
- Reply: Phillip Windell: "Re: need more ip's"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 16:29:44 -0600
How much trouble would it be for you to move to a class B Subnet?
"Vinny Hahn" <VinnyHahn@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:60204B21-656C-4E66-A623-3A8836123506@microsoft.com...
> Here's my scenario:
> In my office, I'm running two physically different DCHP servers; one is
> handling the range of 192.168.1.1 - 192.168.1.100, the other is handling
> 192.168.1.101 - 192.168.254. This gives us the full range of
192.168.1.1 -
> 192.168.1.254, but we are running low on IP's now.
>
> We also have two remote plants, that'll I'll refer to as plant 1 and plant
> 2.
>
> We maintain a VPN connection to Plant 1 between two firewalls and they use
> the range of 192.168.2.x.
>
> Same for plant 2, but their IP range is 192.168.3.x.
>
> The LAN side of my firewall is set to 192.168.1.1/255.255.255.0.
>
> What would be the best solution to give my office network more IP's?
>
> If I made a new range of say 192.168.4.x, would they see the devices on
the
> 192.168.1.x subnet and vise versa? All the nodes in my office log into
the
> same domain. What issues will I encounter if I go this route?
>
> Thanx,
> Vinny
- Next message: Preacher Man: "Re: Broadcast"
- Previous message: Herb Martin: "Re: Broadcast"
- In reply to: Vinny Hahn: "need more ip's"
- Next in thread: Phillip Windell: "Re: need more ip's"
- Reply: Phillip Windell: "Re: need more ip's"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
