Running out of available DHCP addresses


We have a server in the office which is currently providing DHCP for a range of computers on the network, I have reviewed the DHCP statistics and it is showing we only have 14 IP addresses left. After reading further I have discovered there is a possibility of setting up something called a Super Scope which I have never done, can someone tell me how I can go about doing this to provide additional IP addresses on the network?

Thanks in advance.
Who is Participating?
I wear a lot of hats...

"The solutions and answers provided on Experts Exchange have been extremely helpful to me over the last few years. I wear a lot of hats - Developer, Database Administrator, Help Desk, etc., so I know a lot of things but not a lot about one thing. Experts Exchange gives me answers from people who do know a lot about one thing, in a easy to use platform." -Todd S.

James HIT DirectorCommented:
What is your subnet now?
I am assuming it is a class c 192.168.x.x
Emmanuel AdebayoGlobal Windows Infrastructure Engineer - ConsultantCommented:

You have the option superscope or resubnetting. Both of these options require you to make architectural changes to your network.
Create a superscope by through the DHCP manager after determine the subnet that you want to use,i.esay your existing subnet is 192.168.0.x, and you new subnet will be 192.168.1.x

Create the scope for 192.168.1.x.
Complete the task by following the steps in the linkbelow

Resubnetting is the recommended procedure for increasing a DHCP scope when the current scope has entirely consumed the current subnet mask. However, this method requires you to change all subnet hosts and gateways. If you have an address range that has run out of available host addresses, you may be able to change the subnet mask to include a larger share of host addresses. However, simply changing the subnet mask requires that all routers and other statically assigned computers be reconfigured and all DHCP clients have renewed their lease obtaining the new parameters.

Additionally, the entire DHCP scope or scopes must first be deleted and then re-created using the new subnet mask. The potential for duplicate addresses exists during this period if you do not take steps to prevent leasing addresses that other clients may use. Despite all of the aforementioned caveats, resubnetting is still the recommended procedure. The resubnetting configuration creates no additional overhead on the subnet routers or gateways, and keeps all hosts on the same broadcast address.

Experts Exchange Solution brought to you by

Your issues matter to us.

Facing a tech roadblock? Get the help and guidance you need from experienced professionals who care. Ask your question anytime, anywhere, with no hassle.

Start your 7-day free trial
What is the current range of your current scope ?
 If you have, allowing 100 IP addresses, you can delete this scope and create a larger one using the same subnet, let's say Of course, the newly available IP addresses in the scope have all to be available (or you may want to change the IP addresses of the nodes that currently use addresses in the range, or exclude them...)
Creating Active Directory Users from a Text File

If your organization has a need to mass-create AD user accounts, watch this video to see how its done without the need for scripting or other unnecessary complexities.

Tahir2008Author Commented:
The current range is on

Is it possible to leave the existing scope as is because there is a considerable number of reservations and devices running on the existing scope. I was hoping maybe I could add an additional scope like and set the DHCP to start leasing those addresses when it gets full?
This is not that simple. is ANOTHER subnet, so you would have to route packets between both subnets, using a router of some kind. You would also have to set a DHCP relay (often known as "ip-helper") for the DHCP requests (DHCP discover packets) to be forwarded from the subnet to your DHCP server
BTW, is the entire subnet so, unless you actually do some kind of routing, your DHCP server should be in that range and its IP address must be static and it should be excluded from the scope range. ALso, npote that with a subnet mask of is usually not to be used as the IP address assigned to a host. Even if this is theoretically legit, since represents also the subnet, some routers and other device will not work correctly with a host having said IP address, so it is recommended to avoid using it. Then, your DHCP scope range should be

In your case, I would try some change in subnetting.
Check this link:
If you use a subnet of instead of, you get 510 hosts instead of  252 and the scope could then be: -
if you use your range becomes - (1022 hosts in the subnet)

You have to change this subnet/subnet mask everywhere, including on the gateway to the Internet, on the DHCP server itself etc. This is not very complex but this is not trivial if you never did it before and you can expect to be doing some mistakes that will prevent your subnet(s) from reaching the Internet or from working correctly. Yet, it is easily fixable so you should not stress too much about it. Just plan to do the change when there are no users, and be sure to perform enough tests to validate that everything works OK.

Check this useful article:
You'll find more resources googling "change IP addressing plan"
Tahir2008Author Commented:
Thanks for the helpful information. Am i correct in understanding if I did not want to go ahead and change the IP addressing plan for the complete network I would required a router on the network which would then lease out the new IP addresses from the new scope on the DHCP?

Am I correct in understanding that this would then work as follows:

Server provides DHCP for ranges:

The primary router would provide the DHCP leases for the range and a new router would then be installed on the network to provide the new range Also would these addresses start being served automatically when the DHCP scope for is full?
This is not as simple.
The subnet that a particular host will belong to depends on the port of the switch it connects to or, if wireless, on the access point it connects to.
So are your hosts wired or wireless? or both?
Furthermore, even if routers/gateways sometimes have an embedded dhcp server, in your case, you would certainly want to use a"central" dhcp server, with 2 scopes. The scope a particular host gets its IP address from depends on the subnet it is connected to.
The router to the subnet that your DHCP server is NOT in will just have to relay DHCP discover messages, using a DHCP relay (or ip-helper in Cisco and Procurve world).
Here is how it works:

Last but not the least, with 2 subnets and 2 scopes, you would NOT begin to consume addresses in when is full...

For all these reasons, I really suggest that you consider resubnetting, using for instance.
This is certainly the path of least resistance. No new router. addresses in 192.168.67.x still working.... You would consume addresses in teh entire scope but existsing hosts that already have an address in 192.168.67.x would usually still get the same address (as long as they renew it before the lease expired)
Check the subnet details here:
Remember that is a Class B network (even if 192.168.x.x are usually class C)
Tahir2008Author Commented:
Another member of staff seems to have completed the superscoping process, still uncertain how this was done but the issue seems resolved now.
It's more than this solution.Get answers and train to solve all your tech problems - anytime, anywhere.Try it for free Edge Out The Competitionfor your dream job with proven skills and certifications.Get started today Stand Outas the employee with proven skills.Start learning today for free Move Your Career Forwardwith certification training in the latest technologies.Start your trial today
Microsoft Legacy OS

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.