Home Networking

189 readers

1 users here now

A community to help people learn, install, set up or troubleshoot their home network equipment and solutions.

Rules

Please stay on topic.
Please use the search function to look for keywords related to what you want to ask before posting since most common issues have been answered.
No Ads. This community is for support and discussion. Ads and self promotion are not welcome here.
No product reviews or announcements. If you have a question about a product, be specific about what you want to know.
Be civil. Don't be a jerk. Not being a jerk is surprisingly easy.
No URL shorteners. URL shorteners tend to hide the real use of a link. For this reason, please use normal links, even if they're long.
No affiliate links.
No gatekeeping. With profession shall come professionalism. Extend help without judging others for their ignorance. The same goes for downvoting of comments or posts for "stupid questions" or not being as knowledgeable as others.

founded 10 months ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Quick and nooby questions concerning subnets and DHCP on a simple home network (alien.top)

submitted 9 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

4 comments fedilink hide all child comments

My consumer-grade router currently uses its defaults for DHCP assignment (192.168.1.0/24)

However, I'd like a "tidier" network. I'm thinking about using 10.0.0.0/21. I'd like to assign IPs for each known user's device into a respective subnet.

This is entirely unnecessary; I don't think I will net any tangible benefits. However, doing so would allow me to achieve a few things:

I learn about networking. I'm currently a total noob.
I am able to build a marginally more organized network (subjective)
- example: client configuration in AdGuard Home is slightly more sensical to my human brain

IP range	Usage
10.0.0.x	"Common" devices; router (.1), home server (.2), Roku (.3), printer (.4)
10.0.1.x	User A's devices, manually assigned via MAC address in the router console
10.0.2.x	User B's devices, manually assigned via MAC address in the router console
10.0.3.x	User C's devices, manually assigned via MAC address in the router console
10.0.4.x	Automatic DHCP assignment starts here; I would manually assign new and recognized devices (i.e. not guests) an IP in their proper subnet when I get around to it.

Questions

Does this make sense?
Are there any consequences I am not anticipating?
Are there any performance considerations?

Potentially very stupid questions

I'll never actually use all 2,048 addresses under the /21 mask -- is there any kind of performance impact by making so many unused host addresses available?
I'll never have 254 devices on this network, let alone 254 on a single subnet. Should I be... "spreading out" the assigned host addresses? Like instead of .1, .2, .3, assign them .8, .16, .32, etc.?

Network information:

Verizon FiOS 300Mbps
CR1000B router/switch/access point all-in-one
Wyse 5070 running a few Docker containers, including a DNS blocker
roughly 12 connected devices, no IoT
- four laptops
- three smartphones
- some secondary devices (smart watches)
- one Roku, used between eight and twelve hours per week
- one printer, almost always off

I will not be replacing the CR1000B anytime soon. Proper VLANs seem to be out of the question. This router does offer -Guest and -IoT; I think -Guest is VLAN'd with a maximum of ten connected devices (weird arbitrary limit) and the -IoT one is 2.4 GHz only, but not VLAN'd.

I'm a networking noob, so please correct me politely.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Thank you for your thoughts!

instead of user A's devices being 10.0.1.x make it 10.0.0.10-19, 20-29 for the next user, 30-39 etc. . . . then the DHCP range make 100-199 . . . that way you still have equal "tidiness" without needing a humongous network size.

This is what I started with before realizing I could also assign the third octet. I'm glad to hear that my original plan would have worked just fine (if slightly uglier to my eye... but I'll choose function over aesthetics).

Some clarifications about what you quoted... I originally wrote:

Should I be... "spreading out" the assigned host addresses? Like instead of .1, .2, .3, assign them .8, .16, .32, etc.?

Did you intend to highlight this portion? And if so, could you please explain further?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

no i didnt indent to highlight that portion. just the first sentence.