I recently visited a foreign LAN that had a subnet 100.200.100.0 with netmask 255.255.255.0. There were less than ten devices on the LAN, with no more than 20 devices ever planned to be on the network. I thought that didn't seem right.
I don't know a whole lot about subnetting, but I do know that a "large LAN" needing 254 hosts could use the popular 192.168.0.0/24 subnet, which falls into a class C network addressing scheme. It seems to me like the person who set up this foreign network just picked a bunch of random numbers (100, 200, 100) to make up their subnet, rather than picking a network that falls into a classed IP addressing scheme.
Because of the subnet mask 255.255.255.0 (24 mask bits), wouldn't 100.200.100.0/24 be neither class A nor class C? To be a class A network, wouldn't the subnet mask need to be 255.0.0.0 (8 mask bits), and to be a class C, the first octet would need fall into the range 192-223?
Does any of this even matter? Class C, Class B, Class A that is. Can a network administrator just pick any numbers they want to create a simple LAN? Are network classes just an optional specification that can be safely ignored?
I don't know a whole lot about subnetting, but I do know that a "large LAN" needing 254 hosts could use the popular 192.168.0.0/24 subnet, which falls into a class C network addressing scheme. It seems to me like the person who set up this foreign network just picked a bunch of random numbers (100, 200, 100) to make up their subnet, rather than picking a network that falls into a classed IP addressing scheme.
Because of the subnet mask 255.255.255.0 (24 mask bits), wouldn't 100.200.100.0/24 be neither class A nor class C? To be a class A network, wouldn't the subnet mask need to be 255.0.0.0 (8 mask bits), and to be a class C, the first octet would need fall into the range 192-223?
Does any of this even matter? Class C, Class B, Class A that is. Can a network administrator just pick any numbers they want to create a simple LAN? Are network classes just an optional specification that can be safely ignored?
Last edited: