Solved

Recommended size of Subnet

Posted on 2014-10-25
7
261 Views
Last Modified: 2014-10-26
I wonder what's the recommended size of each subnet. for instance how many hosts should be in each subnets, considering mapping Vlan to subnet.
Example:
let's say I have this network 172.16.0.0/16 that I will subnet and make it 172.16.0.0/24
This will give me 256 Subnets of 254 hosts each, and each Subnet will have it is own Broadcast address : example:
Network:   172.16.0.0/24          
Broadcast: 172.16.0.255          
HostMin:   172.16.0.1            
HostMax:   172.16.0.254          
Hosts/Net: 254                    


Network:   172.16.1.0/24          
Broadcast: 172.16.1.255          
HostMin:   172.16.1.1            
HostMax:   172.16.1.254          
Hosts/Net: 254

As know Best practice is to map each subnet to a specific Vlan. however I am not sure if 254 hosts in one  Vlan does not impact performance.

OR do I need to subnet it further:  to /25 or /26 in order to have smaller subnets ?

Thanks
0
Comment
Question by:jskfan
[X]
Welcome to Experts Exchange

Add your voice to the tech community where 5M+ people just like you are talking about what matters.

  • Help others & share knowledge
  • Earn cash & points
  • Learn & ask questions
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • +1
7 Comments
 
LVL 50

Accepted Solution

by:
Don Johnston earned 215 total points
ID: 40404354
Unfortunately, there is no absolute answer.  It used to be the size of the network was limited by collisions. But now that we use switches, collisions are no longer a limiting factor.

Excessive broadcast can be a limiting factor (rule of thumb is more than 20% is excessive). But you have to have a lot of devices to hit that number.

So at the end of the day, the size of the subnet usually becomes a management/security issue.  Which means as large as a few thousand to as small as 2.
0
 
LVL 18

Assisted Solution

by:Akinsd
Akinsd earned 215 total points
ID: 40404372
Avoid subnets larger than 510 hosts (/23) as much as possible
Cisco still recommends a maximum of 500 which is 510
I also recommended also to have QoS in place, but a MUST for networks with more than 500 hosts (all subnets combined) to ensure that 1 host does not hog traffic unecessarily.

/25 (126 hosts) or /26 (62 hosts) are good as long as you have enough IPs for hosts in respective subnets.

Broadcast storms may cause congestion, collisions and eventual packet loss. Mac Address flooding can cause a switch to function as a hub and will pass traffic in all directions.
0
 
LVL 26

Expert Comment

by:Fred Marshall
ID: 40404384
I agree with Don Johnson.  One size does not fit all.  That answers your question pretty well.
It's important to first define what your problem is.
0
Optimum High-Definition Video Viewing and Control

The ATEN VM0404HA 4x4 4K HDMI Matrix Switch supports 4K resolutions of UHD (3840 x 2160) and DCI (4096 x 2160) with refresh rates of 30 Hz (4:4:4) and 60 Hz (4:2:0). It is ideal for applications where the routing of 4K digital signals is required.

 

Author Comment

by:jskfan
ID: 40404429
172.16.0.0/25 will give 512 Subnets with 126 Hosts each.

So if a VLAN has 126 hosts , will that be too much with regards to performance ?
0
 
LVL 26

Assisted Solution

by:Fred Marshall
Fred Marshall earned 70 total points
ID: 40404463
As I said in other words: "it depends".

With 126 hosts AND smart switches AND typical office traffic then most certainly.
Without the smart switches - very likely yes.
But, if the traffic is unusual then ... how unusual is it?
0
 
LVL 18

Expert Comment

by:Akinsd
ID: 40404479
You should be fine with /25.
2 subnets with 126 hosts each constitute 2 separate broadcast domains as they have a routed interface separating them. That's one of the main purpose of subnetting, to contain broadcast domains in small chunks.
It's like dividing a class of 510 grade 2 students into 2 classes. Imagine 126 students shouting (broadcasting) messages to everyone compared to 510 students shouting messages. There is more discombobulation in the class of 510 than 126.
You should however implement QoS on your core switch. Auto QoS should suffice
0
 

Author Closing Comment

by:jskfan
ID: 40404976
Thank you
0

Featured Post

Free Tool: Port Scanner

Check which ports are open to the outside world. Helps make sure that your firewall rules are working as intended.

One of a set of tools we are providing to everyone as a way of saying thank you for being a part of the community.

Question has a verified solution.

If you are experiencing a similar issue, please ask a related question

I eventually solved a perplexing problem setting up telnet for a new switch.  I installed a new Cisco WS-03560X-24P switch connected to an existing Cisco 4506 running a WS-X4013-10GE Sup II-Plus. After configuring vlans and trunking,  I could no…
In the hope of saving someone else's sanity... About a year ago we bought a Cisco 1921 router with two ADSL/VDSL EHWIC cards to load balance local network traffic over the two broadband lines we have, but we couldn't get the routing to work consi…
After creating this article (http://www.experts-exchange.com/articles/23699/Setup-Mikrotik-routers-with-OSPF.html), I decided to make a video (no audio) to show you how to configure the routers and run some trace routes and pings between the 7 sites…
After creating this article (http://www.experts-exchange.com/articles/23699/Setup-Mikrotik-routers-with-OSPF.html), I decided to make a video (no audio) to show you how to configure the routers and run some trace routes and pings between the 7 sites…
Suggested Courses

717 members asked questions and received personalized solutions in the past 7 days.

Join the community of 500,000 technology professionals and ask your questions.

Join & Ask a Question