Netgate Discussion Forum
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Search
    • Register
    • Login

    Renumbering my network. Any pitfalls?

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Off-Topic & Non-Support Discussion
    11 Posts 5 Posters 1.5k Views
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • L
      LeiShen
      last edited by LeiShen

      I should also mention I have a 4 port Router currently set up as:

      Port 1: 192.168.1.x
      Port 2: 192.168.2.x
      Port 3: 192.168.3.x
      Port 3: Wan to Modem
      

      So I want to keep these subnet separate, so maybe moving to a Class B Address is not a good idea?

      Or for a Class B, like 172.16-31.x.x, perhaps set it like this?

      Port 1: 172.16.x.x
      Port 2: 172.17.x.x
      Port 3: 172.18.x.x
      Port 4: Wan to Modem
      

      I guess I could stick with 192.168 and just reassign like this, maybe it would be uncommon enough:

      Port 1: 192.168.201.x
      Port 2: 192.168.202.x
      Port 3: 192.168.203.x
      Port 4: Wan to Modem
      

      Thoughts, opinions, pitfalls?

      Thanks!!

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • KOMK
        KOM
        last edited by

        There is nothing magical about IP addresses. Just pick a subnet and renumber. Use anything in the rfc1918 space you want:

        10.0.0.0/8
        172.16.0.0/12
        192.168.0.0/16

        They are completely interchangeable. There is nothing spooky about 172.16.0.0/12, just people aren't as used to seeing it as they are with 192.168.0.0/16.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
        • L
          LeiShen
          last edited by

          So I could something like:

          Port 1: 172.17.1.x
          Port 2: 172.17.2.x
          Port 3: 172.17.3.x
          Port 4: Wan to Modem
          

          With a netmask of 255.255.255.0 and that wouldn't break anything?

          Thanks!

          NogBadTheBadN 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • NogBadTheBadN
            NogBadTheBad @LeiShen
            last edited by

            This post is deleted!
            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • KOMK
              KOM
              last edited by

              I have no knowledge of your network configuration so I can't say it wouldn't break anything, but there is always going to be disruption if you renumber a network.

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
              • T
                TheNarc
                last edited by

                The opportunities for things to "break" should really only arise in places where you're counting on certain devices being assigned specific IPs. For example, if you have any DHCP static mappings configured, aliases, port forwarding rules, etc. you'll need to review and update them as necessary. But the devices on your network themselves don't care what IPs they get.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                • DerelictD
                  Derelict LAYER 8 Netgate
                  last edited by

                  $ randomlan
                  10.138.112.0
                  172.18.173.0
                  192.168.111.0
                  fdb4:b660:d594::/48
                  

                  Chattanooga, Tennessee, USA
                  A comprehensive network diagram is worth 10,000 words and 15 conference calls.
                  DO NOT set a source address/port in a port forward or firewall rule unless you KNOW you need it!
                  Do Not Chat For Help! NO_WAN_EGRESS(TM)

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                  • L
                    LeiShen
                    last edited by LeiShen

                    Well, that was a little painful. But its done!
                    Used the 172.17.x.x private block.

                    LAN1: 172.17.1.x
                    LAN2: 172.17.2.x
                    LAN3: 172.17.3.x
                    

                    With net masks of 255.255.255.0

                    I also configued DHCP Server and DNS Resolver for as many of the 'static' devices as I could on the network so I won't have to poke at each one if I every do this again. Also set up DNS Resolver for those DHCP devices so I can find them all by name now - I know, its pretty basic, but 'new to me'!
                    The only real gotcha was the Wifi Routers: Gotta log into a different interface than the one your working on, otherwise poof you're no longer connected! :)
                    Plus they are all in Bridge mode, and with LinkSys routers, if you put them in DHCP mode and Bridge Mode, they disappear from the network and you can no longer access their Admin pages: caveat emptor!
                    So they had to be kept Static IPs.
                    Thanks for everyones' help and reassurance! No more cross-network conflicts!!
                    Yay!!!

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • DerelictD
                      Derelict LAYER 8 Netgate
                      last edited by

                      @leishen said in Renumbering my network. Any pitfalls?:

                      No more cross-network conflicts!!

                      Until there are. IPv6 will make this a virtual impossibility.

                      But 172.17 should pretty much eliminate them for you for now. Good move.

                      Chattanooga, Tennessee, USA
                      A comprehensive network diagram is worth 10,000 words and 15 conference calls.
                      DO NOT set a source address/port in a port forward or firewall rule unless you KNOW you need it!
                      Do Not Chat For Help! NO_WAN_EGRESS(TM)

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                      • DerelictD
                        Derelict LAYER 8 Netgate
                        last edited by

                        Let this thread serve as an example of seeing the problem, setting a maintenance window, and renumbering. It can be a MUCH better path than trying to NAT all the things because you decided to deploy 192.168.1.0/24 or, much worse, 10.0.0.0/8.

                        Chattanooga, Tennessee, USA
                        A comprehensive network diagram is worth 10,000 words and 15 conference calls.
                        DO NOT set a source address/port in a port forward or firewall rule unless you KNOW you need it!
                        Do Not Chat For Help! NO_WAN_EGRESS(TM)

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                        • First post
                          Last post
                        Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.