Should we go for /16 or /24 while designing the segment?

We just acquired a new facility and are re-assigning a new IP segment for it. There are about 90 users and 120 computers/network devices in that facility.
Based on what we have now we would like to assign the segment My boss tends to use for it but instead of such a big segment I suggest using three smaller segments: for data for VPN for voip

Can you comment on the above two proposals and give your suggestion please? 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.

Scott CSenior EngineerCommented:
I'd go with the 3 smaller segments.  One of our customers has a large segment and has some devices that are killing network performance for everyone.

If the devices were on their own segment, I feel that the entire network would not have been impacted.
Ken BooneNetwork ConsultantCommented:
Definitely 3 /24 segments.  For a myriad of reasons.

It is a whole lot quicker to scan a /24 than a /16 if you are looking for something.
You mentioned voice.  Best practice is to ALWAYS have voice on its own network segment.
Management - Much easier to identify what traffic is what when they are broken out.  
Security - You can put ACLs on the vlans to limit traffic flows between vlans if you need to.
Chris MillardCommented:
With that amount of devices, I think that /16 is overkill. 3 smaller subnets is MORE than adequate. What I might be tempted to do if it were me though, is create the subnets as:- - DATA - VPN - VOIP

That way, if ever you want to expand your data scope, you could re-subnet as:- - that way you would have DATA addresses from - and wouldn't have to worry about re-subnetting VPN or VOIP

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
Bryant SchaperCommented:
I will give my take too.  /16 is overkill, however, if you have multiple facilities I recommend a /16 for site.  This will make the route tables smaller for remote sites connecting, they know that is new facility.

Then in the new facility use 3 subnets,,, ect......   You can add more subnets in the future with ease,
Similar to Bryant's comment, if you decide on three /24 subnets, then I'd suggest a /22 for the whole site, which you can break up into four /24 subnets.  Then you only have one routing table entry for the whole site.
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
Network Architecture

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.