Pfsense
-
@scottalanmiller said in Pfsense:
a /23 (the smallest recommended these days)
Really? I never heard of that.. Where is this recommended? (truly curious)
Pretty much anywhere it’s discussed
It’s been the standard in the enterprise since the rise of switching.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Pfsense:
@scottalanmiller said in Pfsense:
a /23 (the smallest recommended these days)
Really? I never heard of that.. Where is this recommended? (truly curious)
Pretty much anywhere it’s discussed
It’s been the standard in the enterprise since the rise of switching.
Right.. well I feel like you're from a different world or something as you're always saying things that seem very different than what's commonly heard of. That being said, we actually have a /23 network where I work but I've had numerous people comment on it as being a "weird setup". I just assumed they had little knowledge of networking and are used to the very common /24 setups on a lot of home routers and things.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Pfsense:
@scottalanmiller said in Pfsense:
a /23 (the smallest recommended these days)
Really? I never heard of that.. Where is this recommended? (truly curious)
Pretty much anywhere it’s discussed
It’s been the standard in the enterprise since the rise of switching.
Right.. well I feel like you're from a different world or something as you're always saying things that seem very different than what's commonly heard of. That being said, we actually have a /23 network where I work but I've had numerous people comment on it as being a "weird setup". I just assumed they had little knowledge of networking and are used to the very common /24 setups on a lot of home routers and things.
I'd say that /23 and /22 are the norms for good networks. Smaller than that is super common - artefacts of the fact that almost all SMBs are totally out of touch and work off of myths and rumours instead of facts and research.
Remember, in IT (and most things in life) if most people do it, it's probably not a good idea and something to avoid. Best practices and good rules of thumb are never things followed by the majority.
-
Right.. well I feel like you're from a different world or something as you're always saying things that seem very different than what's commonly heard of.
I like to think that this is because I'm competent and most people are not. I know that most people are not. That part isn't in question. The question is am I just random, or am I competent
-
My wife sent this to me an hour ago.
Fools seldom differ. When all you hear is one thing without good reasoning, assume it is fools not differing
-
I actually made a video on LAN sizes just the other day. I'm waiting on it to be edited.
-
A huge number of people think that /23 is weird because they don't realize that it is post 1993 and that class based networks haven't existed in 24 years. Their "what is normal" is based on 1970-1993 "standards" of class based networking and non-switched networks. The amount of insanely outdated information forming the foundation of myths like this are often totally crazy.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Pfsense:
A huge number of people think that /23 is weird because they don't realize that it is post 1993 and that class based networks haven't existed in 24 years. Their "what is normal" is based on 1970-1993 "standards" of class based networking and non-switched networks. The amount of insanely outdated information forming the foundation of myths like this are often totally crazy.
So I've noticed. I spent a good deal of time studying subnetting (when I was trying to wrap my head around it) and now that I get it, I realize that a lot of people don't.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Pfsense:
I actually made a video on LAN sizes just the other day. I'm waiting on it to be edited.
I'm finally going through and watching all your videos. I'm also trying to read through all your posts on SMBjournal
-
@scottalanmiller said in Pfsense:
A huge number of people think that /23 is weird because they don't realize that it is post 1993 and that class based networks haven't existed in 24 years. Their "what is normal" is based on 1970-1993 "standards" of class based networking and non-switched networks. The amount of insanely outdated information forming the foundation of myths like this are often totally crazy.
So I've noticed. I spent a good deal of time studying subnetting (when I was trying to wrap my head around it) and now that I get it, I realize that a lot of people don't.
Yeah, most people have no idea how that works and so much of what is taught is completely wrong. Sometimes just historically wrong. Other times, totally nonsensical. Ask people why they only use /24 and they will either have no idea, make a totally wrong claim like class based networking exists, or have completely wrong technical ideas like that broadcasts are a problem (they were, when we used hubs and our top network speed was 10Mb/s.)
If you think about hubs and 10Mb/s and switches with 10Gb/s with broadcast traffic having greatly decreased, not increased (by a HUGE degree because we used to use full on broadcast stuff like NetBIOS that hasn't been used in decades) ... and the very idea that a /24 was functional in the 1990s and is still the limit today is totally absurd. Things have only improved. In reality, you could probably use a /16 and be okay today. It's just silly big and no one cares anymore.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Pfsense:
I actually made a video on LAN sizes just the other day. I'm waiting on it to be edited.
I'm finally going through and watching all your videos. I'm also trying to read through all your posts on SMBjournal
Better watch quickly, I've got 14 videos done and in the queue to upload, lol.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Pfsense:
I actually made a video on LAN sizes just the other day. I'm waiting on it to be edited.
I'm finally going through and watching all your videos.
Remember to like and subscribe
-
@scottalanmiller said in Pfsense:
@scottalanmiller said in Pfsense:
I actually made a video on LAN sizes just the other day. I'm waiting on it to be edited.
I'm finally going through and watching all your videos.
Remember to like and subscribe
Yeah I subscribed. Be prepared for me to come to you with questions and things..
-
i still don;t understand subnetting the way I should. At least I know it though.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Pfsense:
@scottalanmiller said in Pfsense:
@scottalanmiller said in Pfsense:
a /23 (the smallest recommended these days)
Really? I never heard of that.. Where is this recommended? (truly curious)
Pretty much anywhere it’s discussed
It’s been the standard in the enterprise since the rise of switching.
Right.. well I feel like you're from a different world or something as you're always saying things that seem very different than what's commonly heard of. That being said, we actually have a /23 network where I work but I've had numerous people comment on it as being a "weird setup". I just assumed they had little knowledge of networking and are used to the very common /24 setups on a lot of home routers and things.
I'd say that /23 and /22 are the norms for good networks. Smaller than that is super common - artefacts of the fact that almost all SMBs are totally out of touch and work off of myths and rumours instead of facts and research.
Remember, in IT (and most things in life) if most people do it, it's probably not a good idea and something to avoid. Best practices and good rules of thumb are never things followed by the majority.
The research bit is the problem I have here. It's not like there is a definitive guide (book) to good networking, at least not that I know of.
When I reading my MSCE books in the mid to late 90's /24 was the common thing. Now with understanding, etc I see the use of /22 and /23 and the advantages - but again, are their general networking books that everyone should be reading that we simply aren't?
-
@dashrender said in Pfsense:
When I reading my MSCE books in the mid to late 90's /24 was the common thing. Now with understanding, etc I see the use of /22 and /23 and the advantages - but again, are their general networking books that everyone should be reading that we simply aren't?
Even the MS stuff in the 1990s told WHY /24 was used, so in reality they explained why it is too small today. Yes, /24 was common then, just like RAID 5, but since MS was clear as to why those were chosen and what factors were used, I'd say that they were pretty clear on why that is no longer true by the early 2000s.
-
A /24 is a silly thing on almost any SMB network. With the number of devices per user on a modern network you will smack that limit quick.
-
@jaredbusch said in Pfsense:
A /24 is a silly thing on almost any SMB network. With the number of devices per user on a modern network you will smack that limit quick.
Even at home it's not hard to hit it quickly these days. I mean, not going to happen often. But between routers, switches, access points, mobile phones, VoIP devices, IoT devices, sensors, laptops, desktops, gaming machines, visitors, etc. and if you have a home lab with tons of VMs or containers, it adds up fast.
-
-
@scottalanmiller said in Pfsense:
@jaredbusch said in Pfsense:
A /24 is a silly thing on almost any SMB network. With the number of devices per user on a modern network you will smack that limit quick.
Even at home it's not hard to hit it quickly these days. I mean, not going to happen often. But between routers, switches, access points, mobile phones, VoIP devices, IoT devices, sensors, laptops, desktops, gaming machines, visitors, etc. and if you have a home lab with tons of VMs or containers, it adds up fast.
Yeah, its possible if every device is static and the lease time is unlimited.
