[MLB-WIRELESS] IP address range for Geelong?

[Tristan Gulyas]

G'day.

> .. Now, I realise it's not my place to dictate what part of the
> RFC1918 range people should use for their networks.. but my point is
> that most existing networks, especially home networks which will be on the
> wireless network will be using class C 192.168.x.x, or class B,
> 172.x.x.x, because they have less than 255 hosts. (just because you
> opted for a class A private network, doesn't mean everyone else did)

I do run my home network on 192.168.0.x, 192.168.1.x and 192.168.2.x (some
are test VLAN/subnets).  I don't mind changing subnets for external
connectivity of any form.  Just because 24.x.x.x is a class-A subnet doesn't
mean people can't divide it up, for example.  Telstra had a /16 of that.
Many broadband companies use space in that range.

> I was a big fan of the idea of a subnet per postcode, however a
> postcode like "3551" will probably kill things (yeah, my IP is
> 10.551.15.23); but a table of areas should do.

Yes, true.

Subnets will be related to geographical location, especially when we might
be several hops away from each other.  So if we allocate IPs via this
method, then we have to first strategically plan a backbone (so we don't
have /28s split up every which way, resulting in larger routing tables) and
then allocate the bulk of the IPs to 'regions'.  Then these regions allocate
IPs and network to neighbouring sites?

Just an idea.

-t.


--
To unsubscribe, send mail to minordomo at wireless.org.au with a subject of 'unsubscribe melbwireless'  
Archive at: http://www.wireless.org.au/cgi-bin/minorweb.pl?A=LIST&L=melbwireless
IRC at: au.austnet.org #melb-wireless