DHCP Help

[scottyses]

I am planning a new domain and I want some advice.

There will be three sites. There will be one domain across all there sites.
Ip Ranges
Site 1-10.0.0.1/22
Site 2-10.0.4.0/22
Site 3-10.0.8.0/22

There will be DC at each site the DNS will replicate across the three DC'S and will recplicate the three scopes reverse DNS. Each site will have its own DHCP Server. There will be a router between each site to stop broadcast traffic so machines at each site get the correct lease address.

Have I missed anything will it work. Will Clients be able to access the different subnets to access our internet/mail services. Will it cause any DNS Problems?

Thanks

Scott @ Stamford Endowed Schools

[FN-GM]

You will need to configure the router so it knows the different subnets.

Just out of curiosity how are you connecting the sites?

[powdarrmonkey]

As long as you set up AD Sites and Services correctly (i.e. tell your DCs what subnet they live in and how to replicate to the others) and your DNS zones are accessible, you won't have problems. The routers just forward traffic appropriately.

If there's a firewall guarding each subnet though it gets more complex. With what you're planning it sounds like you just want to limit broadcast traffic.

[raufdean]

Out of curiosity why /22 ?

Rauf

[powdarrmonkey]

Out of curiosity why /22 ?

1024 addresses is a nice number for a site subnet. 255 becomes limiting very quickly by the time you add printers, access points, managed switches...


Edit: by which I mean 1022, of course.

[budgester]

You are using the private Class A network address here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classful_network

Is there any reason for this, I would normally use a class C private network with a netmask of 22

e.g.

192.168.0.0/22
192.168.4.0/22
192.168.8.0/22

[DMcCoy]

You are using the private Class A network address here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classful_network

Is there any reason for this, I would normally use a class C private network with a netmask of 22

e.g.

192.168.0.0/22
192.168.4.0/22
192.168.8.0/22

10.0.0.x and 10.0.x.x are so much more aesthetically pleasing than 192. etc. All I have to do is avoid using 10.20.x.x as thats my RBC connection, or 10.0.0.x with a subnet of 255.0.0.0.

There's nothing wrong with using a smaller part of a bigger range. I'm using 10.0.0.x through to 10.0.8.xx and clients are all on 10.0.200.x-10.0.230.x just because its nice and neat and can be tied into my vlan numbering.

[powdarrmonkey]

Easier to type, too. Classful addressing doesn't make any sense for private networks, it makes the assumptions that you're not going to extend the subnet masks. Classful addressing is a dying art.