http://www.ISAserver.org ------------------------------------------------------- Well, to be pedantic, 1918 specifies 192.168.0.0 as a "block" of 256 C-Class subnets, not as a subnet in itself. So you really can't call 192.168 a /16 subnet. t On 7/12/06 7:57 AM, "Jim Harrison" <jim@xxxxxxxxxxxx> spoketh to all: > http://www.ISAserver.org > ------------------------------------------------------- > > 1. Per RFC 1918, 192.168 is a /16 subnet; not a /24. > 2. ISA will not care so long as you define the network properly. > > Sent via WM5-enabled PPC-phone > > -----Original Message----- > From: "Taps" <Taps@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > To: isalist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > Sent: 7/11/06 18:47 > Subject: [isalist] Isa 2004 and CIDR? > > http://www.ISAserver.org > ------------------------------------------------------- > > I know this is going to sound like a silly question, but I cant find any > information confirming or denying this: > > We are currently using a 192.168.140.0/24 subnet in our internal > network. Recently, we have started using VMWare to do support of some > of our customers. We like to have duplicate setups of their servers in > our virtual environment. At the extreme, our customers have 7 separate > servers per site which we duplicate. We have recently acquired many new > customers and about half our what we term "multi-site". So there is a > possiblity of 14 or 21 servers. Each of which needing a static IP > address (because of the stupid way the software is written). > > With the addition of these, plus the rest of our network, we are running > out of IP Addresses. I am thinking of dropping the subnet mask back to > a /23 or /22. To give me a usable range of > 192.168.140.1-192.168.143.254. > > I realizing because of CIDR, the theory of 192.x.x.x needing to be a > classC isnt an absolute anymore. But before I go through and make any > changes, I was wondering if anyone could confirm or deny that ISA will > handle this without any major issues. > > Before you ask, yes, I plan on testing this before I roll it out. But > that wont be for a while. I figured if anyone had tried something > similar they could clue me in on any issues that they might have had. > If someone has tried it and it just wont work, then I will find another > alternative. > > And yes, switching to a 10.x.x.x address was considered. But again, > with the way some of the software was written, the IP addresses would > need to stay the same. > > > > -- > > Taps@xxxxxxxxxxxx > http://Taps.Iniquity.Org > - "What spirit is so empty and blind, that it cannot recognize the fact > that the foot is more noble than the shoe, and skin more beautiful than > the garment with which it is clothed?" > -- Michaelangelo > > - "Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on > > > All mail to and from this domain is GFI-scanned. > > ------------------------------------------------------ > List Archives: //www.freelists.org/archives/isalist/ > ISA Server Newsletter: http://www.isaserver.org/pages/newsletter.asp > ISA Server Articles and Tutorials: > http://www.isaserver.org/articles_tutorials/ > ISA Server Blogs: http://blogs.isaserver.org/ > ------------------------------------------------------ > Visit TechGenix.com for more information about our other sites: > http://www.techgenix.com > ------------------------------------------------------ > To unsubscribe visit http://www.isaserver.org/pages/isalist.asp > Report abuse to listadmin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > ------------------------------------------------------ List Archives: //www.freelists.org/archives/isalist/ ISA Server Newsletter: http://www.isaserver.org/pages/newsletter.asp ISA Server Articles and Tutorials: http://www.isaserver.org/articles_tutorials/ ISA Server Blogs: http://blogs.isaserver.org/ ------------------------------------------------------ Visit TechGenix.com for more information about our other sites: http://www.techgenix.com ------------------------------------------------------ To unsubscribe visit http://www.isaserver.org/pages/isalist.asp Report abuse to listadmin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx