|
it
newsgroups
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Can someone tell me if this is possible?Hi,
Can someone tell me if this is possible: I have a Windows 2000 Network with 2 domain controllers and a network address of 192.168.1.0. Can I create a site with a Windows 2003 domain controller, ip address 192.168.2.2, or would the ip address of the 2003 server have to be a 192.168.1.--- address?. If the above is not possible, then is it possible to change the subnet mask of my network from 255.255.255.0 to 255.255.0.0 to allow a greater number of hosts, and having the network address of 192.168.0.0. Is this second scenario possible? If the first can work, and also the second which is better? Thanks in advance, Sam Is the new box 2.2 on the same wire as the 1.0 network ? Do you want them to
talk or not ? You could change the subnet for all boxes to 255.255.0.0 and if they are on the same wire (LAN), then you could go willy nilly with addressing 192.168.0.1-192.168.254.254 Show quote "Sam" wrote: > Hi, > > Can someone tell me if this is possible: I have a Windows 2000 Network with > 2 domain controllers and a network address of 192.168.1.0. Can I create a > site with a Windows 2003 domain controller, ip address 192.168.2.2, or would > the ip address of the 2003 server have to be a 192.168.1.--- address?. > > If the above is not possible, then is it possible to change the subnet mask > of my network from 255.255.255.0 to 255.255.0.0 to allow a greater number of > hosts, and having the network address of 192.168.0.0. Is this second > scenario possible? If the first can work, and also the second which is > better? > > Thanks in advance, > Sam > > Hi Erfert,
Yes I want everything to be on the same network. The problem is I want to setup a remote office, I would have preferred to have everything on the 192.168.1.0 network, but I realize it was not going to be possible since my devices would be greater than 254. So I was thinking of making the remote office a 192.168.2.0. but I was not sure if I could have that DC on a different network address from that of headquarters, and still have it as part of the domain as a site. But from what you are telling me it should be possible. If I change the subnet mask on my 192.168.1.0 from 255.255.255.0 to 255.255.0.0, what Class would that be? The subnet mask looks like a class B, but the Network address would start with that of a Class C. Would this be right? Thanks Show quote "Erfuert" wrote: > Is the new box 2.2 on the same wire as the 1.0 network ? Do you want them to > talk or not ? You could change the subnet for all boxes to 255.255.0.0 and if > they are on the same wire (LAN), then you could go willy nilly with > addressing 192.168.0.1-192.168.254.254 > > "Sam" wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > Can someone tell me if this is possible: I have a Windows 2000 Network with > > 2 domain controllers and a network address of 192.168.1.0. Can I create a > > site with a Windows 2003 domain controller, ip address 192.168.2.2, or would > > the ip address of the 2003 server have to be a 192.168.1.--- address?. > > > > If the above is not possible, then is it possible to change the subnet mask > > of my network from 255.255.255.0 to 255.255.0.0 to allow a greater number of > > hosts, and having the network address of 192.168.0.0. Is this second > > scenario possible? If the first can work, and also the second which is > > better? > > > > Thanks in advance, > > Sam > > > > If it is at a remote site, it will be best put in a different IP
subnet. Sites are usually joined by some form of IP routing, so they must be in different IP subnets. Active Directory specifically caters for sites in different IP subnets. In AD Sites and Services you can define the IP subnet for each site. This improves the way AD works (eg it directs hosts to use the DC in the local site for logon, etc). AD replicates across the site link. So your home office would be 192.168.1.0/24 and the site something like 192.168.2.0/24 . Show quote "Sam" <S**@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:8D500E00-557B-4462-99B7-E14B38290417@microsoft.com... > Hi Erfert, > > Yes I want everything to be on the same network. The problem is I want to > setup a remote office, I would have preferred to have everything on the > 192.168.1.0 network, but I realize it was not going to be possible since > my > devices would be greater than 254. So I was thinking of making the remote > office a 192.168.2.0. but I was not sure if I could have that DC on a > different network address from that of headquarters, and still have it as > part of the domain as a site. But from what you are telling me it should > be > possible. > > If I change the subnet mask on my 192.168.1.0 from 255.255.255.0 to > 255.255.0.0, what Class would that be? The subnet mask looks like a class > B, > but the Network address would start with that of a Class C. Would this be > right? > > Thanks > > > "Erfuert" wrote: > >> Is the new box 2.2 on the same wire as the 1.0 network ? Do you want them >> to >> talk or not ? You could change the subnet for all boxes to 255.255.0.0 >> and if >> they are on the same wire (LAN), then you could go willy nilly with >> addressing 192.168.0.1-192.168.254.254 >> >> "Sam" wrote: >> >> > Hi, >> > >> > Can someone tell me if this is possible: I have a Windows 2000 Network >> > with >> > 2 domain controllers and a network address of 192.168.1.0. Can I >> > create a >> > site with a Windows 2003 domain controller, ip address 192.168.2.2, or >> > would >> > the ip address of the 2003 server have to be a 192.168.1.--- address?. >> > >> > If the above is not possible, then is it possible to change the subnet >> > mask >> > of my network from 255.255.255.0 to 255.255.0.0 to allow a greater >> > number of >> > hosts, and having the network address of 192.168.0.0. Is this second >> > scenario possible? If the first can work, and also the second which is >> > better? >> > >> > Thanks in advance, >> > Sam >> > >> > Easy question:
when you type 192.168.1.0/24..... does that mean all addresses within 192.168.1.0 thru 192.168.1.24? Bryce. No. 192.168.1.0/24 is a shorthand way of writing 192.168.1.0 netmask
255.255.255.0 . The 24 indicates the number of bits in the netmask. 10.0.0.0/8 is the same as 10.0.0.0 netmask 255.0.0.0 and so on. Show quote "Bryce" <fuk***@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:O9CxqEFIFHA.3628@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl... > Easy question: > > when you type 192.168.1.0/24..... > > does that mean all addresses within 192.168.1.0 thru 192.168.1.24? > > Bryce. > Question: Is 255.255.255.254 in essence the same thing as 255.255.255.0.
Will they both yield the same number of hosts? Show quote "Bill Grant" wrote: > No. 192.168.1.0/24 is a shorthand way of writing 192.168.1.0 netmask > 255.255.255.0 . The 24 indicates the number of bits in the netmask. > 10.0.0.0/8 is the same as 10.0.0.0 netmask 255.0.0.0 and so on. > > "Bryce" <fuk***@hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:O9CxqEFIFHA.3628@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl... > > Easy question: > > > > when you type 192.168.1.0/24..... > > > > does that mean all addresses within 192.168.1.0 thru 192.168.1.24? > > > > Bryce. > > > > > Yes, you do need to brush up! You may need to write them out in binary
to see the full effect (especially if the mask is not a multiple of eight). The ones in the netmask show how much of the address is used for the network address. The zeros show how many hosts you can have. For a simple example. take 10.0.0.0/8 . 8 bits covers the first octet (ie the 10. field). So the network address is 10 and all IP addresses starting with 10 are in this subnet. Millions of them! At the other extreme, 192.168.1.27/32 (or 192.168.1.27 netmask 255.255.255.255) is all by itself. If you see it in a routing table, it is a host address. It applies to that machine only. Show quote "Sam" <S**@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:D7585071-63E8-4266-8E1B-4F153118500D@microsoft.com... > Question: Is 255.255.255.254 in essence the same thing as 255.255.255.0. > Will they both yield the same number of hosts? > > "Bill Grant" wrote: > >> No. 192.168.1.0/24 is a shorthand way of writing 192.168.1.0 netmask >> 255.255.255.0 . The 24 indicates the number of bits in the netmask. >> 10.0.0.0/8 is the same as 10.0.0.0 netmask 255.0.0.0 and so on. >> >> "Bryce" <fuk***@hotmail.com> wrote in message >> news:O9CxqEFIFHA.3628@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl... >> > Easy question: >> > >> > when you type 192.168.1.0/24..... >> > >> > does that mean all addresses within 192.168.1.0 thru 192.168.1.24? >> > >> > Bryce. >> > >> >> >> "Sam" <S**@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message No.news:D7585071-63E8-4266-8E1B-4F153118500D@microsoft.com... > Question: Is 255.255.255.254 in essence the same thing as 255.255.255.0. > Will they both yield the same number of hosts? 255.255.255.254 = 1 Net ID, 1 Broadcast address, 2 Hosts 255.255.255.0 = 1 Net ID, 1 Broadcast address, 254 Hosts
Show quote
> Can someone tell me if this is possible: I have a Windows 2000 Network The second scenario is possible but the best practice would be to switch all > with > 2 domain controllers and a network address of 192.168.1.0. Can I create a > site with a Windows 2003 domain controller, ip address 192.168.2.2, or > would > the ip address of the 2003 server have to be a 192.168.1.--- address?. > > If the above is not possible, then is it possible to change the subnet > mask > of my network from 255.255.255.0 to 255.255.0.0 to allow a greater number > of > hosts, and having the network address of 192.168.0.0. Is this second > scenario possible? If the first can work, and also the second which is > better? > the IP addresses to 172.16.0.0 range or 10.0.0.0 range. As someone else mentioned if they are in two physically different sites you should probably use different subnets. Otherwise there will be a lot of unnecessary communications over the link between the sites. Kerry Brown KDB Systems Hi All,
I would like to thank everyone for their suggestions and responses. It was always my intention to create a site and use subnets. But I think I need to brush up on my subnetting skills alot more after reading your responses. In response to Kerry Brown, I still want to maintain the 192.168.1.0 network, and not change any of the devices on that network ip address because I do not want to tamper with the ip addresses of the tempermental non windows servers. Thanks Sam Show quote "Kerry Brown" wrote: > > Can someone tell me if this is possible: I have a Windows 2000 Network > > with > > 2 domain controllers and a network address of 192.168.1.0. Can I create a > > site with a Windows 2003 domain controller, ip address 192.168.2.2, or > > would > > the ip address of the 2003 server have to be a 192.168.1.--- address?. > > > > If the above is not possible, then is it possible to change the subnet > > mask > > of my network from 255.255.255.0 to 255.255.0.0 to allow a greater number > > of > > hosts, and having the network address of 192.168.0.0. Is this second > > scenario possible? If the first can work, and also the second which is > > better? > > > > The second scenario is possible but the best practice would be to switch all > the IP addresses to 172.16.0.0 range or 10.0.0.0 range. As someone else > mentioned if they are in two physically different sites you should probably > use different subnets. Otherwise there will be a lot of unnecessary > communications over the link between the sites. > > Kerry Brown > KDB Systems > > >  |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Other interesting topics