Recommended size of Subnet

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
jskfanAsked:
Who is Participating?
 
Don JohnstonInstructorCommented:
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
 
AkinsdNetwork AdministratorCommented:
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
 
Fred MarshallPrincipalCommented:
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
Free Tool: Site Down Detector

Helpful to verify reports of your own downtime, or to double check a downed website you are trying to access.

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.

 
jskfanAuthor Commented:
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
 
Fred MarshallPrincipalCommented:
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
 
AkinsdNetwork AdministratorCommented:
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
 
jskfanAuthor Commented:
Thank you
0
Question has a verified solution.

Are you are experiencing a similar issue? Get a personalized answer when you ask a related question.

Have a better answer? Share it in a comment.

All Courses

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.