• Farid@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Could you please explain, how 172.x is different “size” than 10.x? Don’t both of those have 255*255*255 spaces?

    Edit: Ok, I made ChatGPT explain it to me. Apparently, with 172.x the convention is to only use range from 172.16.x.x to 172.31.x.x because that range is designated for private networks under some internet regulations…

    • ramble81@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Yeah. Here’s a breakdown of the allocations and their sizes:

      • 192.168.0.0/16 - 65,536 addresses
      • 172.16.0.0/12 - 1,048,576 addresses
      • 10.0.0.0/8 - 16,777,216 addresses

      Most home applications only need a single /24 (256 addresses) so they are perfectly fine with 192.168.0.0/24, but as you get larger businesses, you don’t use every single address but instead break it out by function so it’s easier to know what is what and to provide growth in each area.

      • Farid@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        4 months ago

        But tbh, I still don’t see why you can’t just use 10.x but only as many subnets as you need.

        I know jack shit about networking, but I’ve set up OpenWrt routers a couple of times, and set my home network to 10.99. because that was suggested by a ZeroTier tutorial and I thought that’s cool.

        • ramble81@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          4 months ago

          You’re technically correct, you can use any of them. It’s honestly just a matter of preference.