# Total host by Subnets

I am trying to understand how many hosts can exist in a certain subnet based on the subnet mask provided. however it is a bit confusing when the subnet mask does not match the subnet class.
I am checking the table in this link:

I see:
for class B network /25

25 255.255.255.128 128 126 512 64512

Why total hosts is 64512 ?
I thought 126 is the correct number

Thanks
###### 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.

Manager - Infrastructure:  Information TechnologyCommented:
Class B subnet mask is 255.255.0.0 and further subnetting this will be 255.255.128.0 which will yield 32766 hosts.  You could have IP address that may be part of a B class network but you could further subnet it as C class to give you larger subnets with small hosts (i.e. /25 which is 255.255.255.128 for a total of 126 hosts).

/24 is the default C class network which can be subnetted further.  /16 is the default B class and /8 is the default A class.
0
Commented:
jskfan

You are correct, 126 is the total number of hosts available per subnet.  However, if you take a single Class B subnet and divide it into /25 subnets, you'll get 512  different /25 subnets, each capable of hosting 126 devices, giving you a total host capacity of 64512 for the entire Class B subnet.

In practice, you'll most often consider the per subnet-value - The total value will only be considered when planning for future expansion - reserving an entire Class B subnet to use as /25 subnets will provide you with a theoretical capacity of handling 64500 hosts, which could indicate if you're over or under provisioning for your expected demand.
0
Commented:
64512 is the total number of hosts in all (512) possible /25 networks of a class B address range.

A single /25 subnet can contain 126 hosts, as you correctly assumed.

64512 = 512 * 126
0
Author Commented:
Let's make it simple:

192.168.1.0 /24

this will give 24 to the power of 2 (24^2) Networks and (2^8)-2 =254 Hosts (192.16.1.1 to 192.168.1.254)

so the network 192.168.1.0/24 will give 254 hosts, and the only way to get more than 254 hosts is either to create another subnet, example :192.168.2.0 or subnetting the existing network and make it 192.168.1.0 /23

in this case ,what will be the first host and last host ?

is the first will be192.168.1.1 and the last 192.168.126.254 ?

Thanks
0
Commented:
If you have a network of 192.168.1.0/23 you can use addresses 192.168.0.1 - 192.168.1.254 inclusive.  The network is actually 192.168.0.0/23.

192.168.1.0/24 gives 254 hosts.  256 (number of addresses in subnet) - 2 (broadcast and network addresses) = Total usable hosts.

Now, let's break that up.  If we subnet that down to two /25 networks we get 192.168.1.0/25 and 192.168.1.128/25.  That gives us:

192.168.1.1 - 192.168.1.126 and 192.168.1.129 - 192.168.1.254 as usable addresses.  Do the maths...
256/2 = 128.  Subtract the two addresses (broadcast and network - we do this for EVERY subnet), that leaves 126.  Now we do that for the second /25 subnet.  So, instead of losing 2 addresses (broadcast and network address) we lose 4 here (2 per subnet).

Make sense?

In a /16 network we can use 65534 host addresses.  In a /17 network we can use 32766 addresses, but we can use two /17 in the same /16 space, so we have to take 2x broadcast and network addresses from the 65536 inside the /16, so we end up with 65532 host addresses; 32766 per /17.
0
Author Commented:
<<Now we do that for the second /25 subnet.>>

DO you mean  for subnet 192.168.1.0 /25 we'll have usable addresses :
192.168.1.1 - 192.168.1.126 and 192.168.1.129 - 192.168.1.254

I do not understand when you said we ll do that for second subnet, which one ?
0
Commented:
What Craig explained, is actually the opposite what you asked - He took one subnet (192.168.1.0/24) and divided that into two: Subnet 1 - 192.168.1.0/25 (.1 - .126 usable) and Subnet 2 - 192.168.1.128/25 (.129 - .254 usable).

You can do the reverse, i.e. merge two subnets to get more hosts.  So, to create a /23 subnet, the network address will be 192.168.0.0/23, with usable addresses from 192.168.0.1 to 192.168.1.254.

To understand why 192.168.1.0/23 is not a network address, you'll have to look at the binary representation - "The TCP-IP Guide" have an extensive overview at http://www.tcpipguide.com/free/t_IPAddressing.htm
0
Commented:
DO you mean  for subnet 192.168.1.0 /25 we'll have usable addresses :
192.168.1.1 - 192.168.1.126 and 192.168.1.129 - 192.168.1.254

I do not understand when you said we ll do that for second subnet, which one ?
In my example I used a /24 network then split that into 2x /25 networks to explain how we end up with two less hosts per subnet.
0
Author Commented:
If I understand when you take a Network  address such as 192.168.1.0/24, you do not loose many hosts by breaking up that network into smaller subnets..
When you change the address mask, example 192.168.1.0/23  then you are borrowing one Bit from Network to Host..
192.168.1.0/23  the mask can be written as 255.255.254.255
I do not think there will be any host that can be created on the third octet, since:
256-254=2
first subnet is 192.168.0.0, the second is 192.168.2.0, in this case 192.168.1.0 is the broadcast
192.168.4.0 will be the third subnet, etc..... the last will be 192.168.254.254
I don't see where the difference in hosts  between 192.168.1.0/23 and 192.168.1.0/24
0
Author Commented:
oops
192.168.1.0/23  the mask can be written as 255.255.254.0
0
Author Commented:
I Guess where I am still confused, is how many usable hosts per subnet...

I was watching this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GSX1GlaznKM
The instructor is saying  We ll have 62 hosts per subnet.

mmmmmmmmm....confusing,
why it is 62 per subnet... I know the last octet will give us 62 hosts, but the first three octet should not change (10.15.67)...
0
Commented:
I don't see where the difference in hosts  between 192.168.1.0/23 and 192.168.1.0/24
The first issue here is that 192.168.1.0/23 is not a valid network.  You can't use 192.168.1.0 - 192.168.2.255.  It has to be 192.168.0.0 - 192.168.1.255, therefore the network is 192.168.0.0/23.

If you take 192.168.1.0/24 you have 254 hosts.  256 - 2 = 254.
If you take 192.168.0.0/23 you have 510 hosts.  512 - 2 = 510.

However, if you take a /24 (just as an example) and subnet that into smaller blocks it changes depending on how you use it.  This is the same whenever you subnet a block into smaller chunks.

With a /24 we already know we can use 254 hosts.  If we split that into /25 networks we get two subnets - 192.168.0.0/25 and 192.168.0.128/25.  Remember, for EVERY subnet we need to subtract 2 from the subnet size to get the usable hosts, so where we had 254 hosts able to use a /24 we now have 126 hosts which are able to use each /25 network.  126 * 2 = 252 hosts, so you can see we lose 4 host addresses by subnetting in this way instead of 2.

Let's now split the /24 into /26 networks.  We get 4 subnets from the /24 by subnetting down to /26 - 192.168.0.0/26, 192.168.0.64/26, 192.168.0.128/26 and 192.168.192.0/26.  For each subnet here we get 64 - 2 = 62 hosts, so 62 (number of hosts) * 4 (number of subnets) = 248 usable hosts.

The thing to remember is that every subnet loses 2 hosts, regardless of the mask.  When you split a subnet you lose 2 hosts per subnet so where a /24 could accommodate 254 hosts once it's split it's no longer that size, so as per the example, 4x /26 networks can only accommodate 248 hosts.
0
Author Commented:
192.168.0.0/25 =255.255.255.128
number of subnets = 2^25=33554432 subnets
number of hosts= (2^7)-2=126

To my understand the IP addresses we can assign are  :
192.168.0.1       to:  192.168.0.126
192.168.0.128   to: 192.168.0.254

does the  3rd octets change too ?
for instance. these IP addresses we 'll be assigned too:
192.168.1.1  to : 192.168.1.126
192.168.1.128 to :192.168.1.254
========
192.168.2.1 to 192.168.2.126
192.168.2.128 to 192.168.2.254
=======
etc...

Till you reach:
192.168.254.1 to 192.168.254.126
192.168.254.128 to 192.168.254.254

???
0
Author Commented:
192.168.0.0/23=255.255.254.0
number if subnets=(2^23)8388608
number if hosts= (2^9)-2=512-2=510

the IP addresses that will be assigned:
192.168.0.1 to 192.168.0.254 = 254 Ip addresses
192.168.254.1 to 192.168.254.254 = 255 Ip addresses

0
Commented:
In the /23 network above, 192.168.0.0 is the network address and 192.168.1.255 is the broadcast address.  Why would you think that a /23 would have two broadcast and two network addresses?

You're missing something quite fundamental here (apart from your incorrect sum above).  You don't actually 'split' the /23 into two /24 networks when working out how many hosts you would have in a /23.  There is no precedent which says everything revolves around a /24; it's just the most common subnet size when referring to Class C networks.

Firstly, 192.168.1.1 to 192.168.1.254 is 254 addresses, not 255.

Secondly, a /23 is not the same as a /24.  A /23 address range lets you use the .255 and .0 in the middle of the range - they are valid host IP addresses.  Therefore the range 192.168.0.0/23 spans across the following IP addresses:

192.168.0.1 - 192.168.1.254

This includes 192.168.0.255 and 192.168.1.0 as usable host addresses.
0

Experts Exchange Solution brought to you by

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

Author Commented:
I agree, I do not understand well Subnetting...
So when it comes to subnetting  or supernetting, does it apply to the following networks only :

10.0.0.0
172.16.0.0
192.168.0.0

for instance we cannot write 192.168.0.0 /9, because the .168 will ne gone away ?

Also in your statement above :
<<A /23 address range lets you use the .255 and .0 in the middle of the range - they are valid host IP addresses.>>

I have not seen a Host with IP address of :

192.168.0.255 OR 192.168.1.0
0
Author Commented:

Thank you
0
Commented:
@jskfan

Thanks for the points and grades assigned, appreciated.

Just one last note - To understand IP addressing and the conventions, you have to look at the binary representation (or at least understand that the dotted-decimal notation we're used to is a representation of the binary address.)  Every explanation I've read that makes sense, and is universally applicable, starts from that foundation.  That's why I would strongly suggest the explanation provided by "The TCP/IP Guide", at http://www.tcpipguide.com/free/t_IPAddressing.htm - It moves a bit slow at first, but since it doesn't assume any prior knowledge of IP addressing, it is perfect to "fill in the gaps" other sources sometimes choose to ignore.
0
###### 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
Routers

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.