DHCP pools on VLANs
DHCP pools on VLANs
Using this layout: the initial two PCs are on VLAN 10, the next two on VLAN 20, then three on VLAN 30. Each VLAN gets IPs from 172.16.0.2 to 172.16.0.5 with the default gateway at 172.16.0.1. The DHCP server runs on a trunk port connected to all VLANs. For now, it works without a router but will be added later. You’ll need to assign specific DHCP pools to each VLAN to manage the addresses for your 600 users (200 per VLAN).
Set up a DHCP relay on the SVI or sub interface connecting to the DHCP server. Then configure a network for each subnet in the server, using a typical VLAN configuration so the switch forwards traffic from its local IP to the server, which maps to a pool on the DHCP server.
This idea wouldn't fit within the usual boundaries for someone with only CCNA 1 and 2 experience. I'd likely stick to DHCP on a router if it's beyond my current understanding.
The CCNA topics are still relevant, though they may not cover everything you need right now.
The IP examples provided don't apply here. Each VLAN requires its own default gateway and subnet. It would resemble assigning VLAN 10: 172.16.1.0 - 255, VLAN 20: 172.16.2.0 - 255, and VLAN 30: 172.16.3.0 - 255. This assumes a standard 24-bit subnet. You're free to choose any subnet size, but you can't use a single IP range—otherwise communication fails. The smallest feasible subnet is 30 bits, giving each VLAN network access, a gateway, one PC, and a broadcast address. For simplicity, sticking with 24-bit subnets makes calculations easier without needing a calculator. EDIT: If you need two PCs per VLAN, then 29-bit subnets are the smallest option, supporting a gateway and up to five hosts.
Accepted, though the diagram displays an Ethernet switch. Ethernet isn't meant as a direct point-to-point connection. If a PPPoE setup was involved, then yes, but it wasn't mentioned. Additionally, with two PCs per VLAN, the smallest /29 would suit the OP's requirements.
I don't agree with the initial statement. I understand that several major enterprise clients rely on /31 Ethernet connections to reduce address space usage. However, this takes me off track from the main discussion. In the diagram, a /29 is shown as the lowest option, while a /24 would be the smallest technically possible given their mention of 200 clients per VLAN.
EDIT: ignore this, lol, read below.... That is a little like using the network address as a host. It might be possible, but it is outside of the spec. Technically a /31 can only be used on a point-to-point link. Ethernet is inherently designated as a multi-point link. Now can it be done? It depends on the operating system, tweaks may be required. Will it cause problems? Other than possible compatibility issues, no, no problems at all. I personally wish it was allowed, but like I said, it isn't in spec.