Looking for a second opinion on network config
Posted on 2011-09-22
My immediate problem is DHCP is saying it's almost out of IP addresses to pass out. We have as few as 6 left at times. I don't anticipate a lot of growth in the next year or two, but folks will get annoyed if we have to tell them, "Hey, we're out of IPs, sneak over and shut your neighbor's PC off and you can maybe take his."
So the plan is to just exoand the current scope, which is192.168.150.56-254 (199 IPs).
We'd extend it to 192.168.151.56 - 192.168.151.254 (= 453 IPs). We adjust the subnet mask DHCP passes out to 255.255.254.0, boot all the PCs, change the subnet masks on all the staticly assigned devices, and we're good to go.
But this has gotten me thinking: "THEY" say that would work, but what is best practice for a network our size? The network performs reasonaby well. Maybe the little scope expansion above is all we need. Or, maybe we should use some vlans to segregate things - but would this just be added complexity but yeild no real world improvement?
I've done some reading about subnetting, which only shows me how vast my ignorance is. I'd like someone who's 'been-there-done-that' to say a few words about how you'd organize this network.
Here's the data:
- 190 PCs/laptops
- 10 servers
- 11 remote sites which connect via PIX or ASA and a Comcast connection (about 40 of the PCs are spread among these sites, each site orerates as its own subnet)
- our ISP connection is 16 Mbs (this may be too small)
- our main site has 4 buildings connected by fibre optic - that is our main subnet, the one that is running out of IP addresses.
- we have maybe 4 managed switches and a bunch of unmanaged ones. We don't actually do any managing with the switches.
- One significant addition that looks like it's headed our way is VOIP, within 2 years
I'd appreciate any insight on what we might realistically change or add.