locked
changing network to add more IP's with subnet 255.255.254.0 causing gateway problems with static ip addressing (Im missing something) RRS feed

  • Question

  • I recently needed to expand the network for future use. I did some reading and it seems the easiest and most efficient way to do this was to change my subnet mask to 255.255.254.0

    my network has been 192.168.0.1-192.168.0.254 I now should have a network of 192.168.0.1-192.168.1.254 ok...

    so I change the subnet mask on every device I can think of on the network (switches, servers, printers, ect.)

    my server resides at 192.168.0.1

    my gateway is 192.168.0.2

    I try to set an IP address of a laptop at 192.168.1.100 with subnet mask 255.255.254.0 and gateway of 192.168.0.2 and DNS server at 192.168.0.1 and the message says that I cannot have a gateway on a different network.

    So here is where I got confused and quit for the day before I did any real damage.

    Any Ideas about steps I may have missed or anything I may have overlooked in this change.

    My DHCP server just dishes out addresses on the 0.x network, and I don't care if it issues any addresses to the 1.x network at this time I was going to make all the addresses on the 1.x network STATIC

    Any help here would be greatly apprecieated, oh great and powerful dragons....

    Wednesday, April 13, 2011 11:08 PM

Answers

  • you must not have read the question.  I started off stating that I needed to expand the network for future use.

    not only is the answer here irrelevant,  but the whole point was to expand the network beyond 254 clients.  The subnet mask of 255.255.254.0 is correct for a 500 client load.

    the answer actually was:  TIME

    the next morning, after coming to work, clients could get ip addresses of 192.168.1.x and could communicate freely between the 0.x and the 1.x addresses.

    so, in conclusion, it takes time evidently for the changes made to the subnet masks on the network devices to propogate and the change was not effective instantly.

     

    Thursday, April 14, 2011 6:04 PM

All replies

  • Hi Doctor Fishbone :)

    Well your ip address 192.168.0.1 belongs to /24, therefore is wise to use 255.255.255.0 instead of 255.255.255.254

    it depends on which class range of IP address you are using. different class of ip address will use different class of subnet mask :) let me know if you need further help :D

    you can always google for subnet calculator

    Hope the below link help u :)

    http://support.microsoft.com/kb/164015


    Guowen Su | CCNA, CCIP, MCP, MCSA, MCSE, MCTS, MCITP, CEH | http://www.microsoft.com/en/sg/default.aspx Our Goal? VERY SATISFIED Customers. If you're not...let's talk!!
    • Proposed as answer by Soh.M Thursday, April 14, 2011 4:32 PM
    Thursday, April 14, 2011 4:32 PM
  • you must not have read the question.  I started off stating that I needed to expand the network for future use.

    not only is the answer here irrelevant,  but the whole point was to expand the network beyond 254 clients.  The subnet mask of 255.255.254.0 is correct for a 500 client load.

    the answer actually was:  TIME

    the next morning, after coming to work, clients could get ip addresses of 192.168.1.x and could communicate freely between the 0.x and the 1.x addresses.

    so, in conclusion, it takes time evidently for the changes made to the subnet masks on the network devices to propogate and the change was not effective instantly.

     

    Thursday, April 14, 2011 6:04 PM
  • weird ? do you mean TTL? i dont quite understand your approach but definitely want to know what you mean by time ? do you mean DHCP leased ? if so then you will need to check on your DHCP server ? to ensure the leased timing was set to the time which you have requested ??
    Guowen Su | CCNA, CCIP, MCP, MCSA, MCSE, MCTS, MCITP, CEH | http://www.microsoft.com/en/sg/default.aspx Our Goal? VERY SATISFIED Customers. If you're not...let's talk!!
    Friday, April 15, 2011 9:33 AM
  • Ever had any issues after your DNS finished replicating?

    Tuesday, February 6, 2018 8:07 PM