if i have one network 192.168.1.0/255.255.255.0, then i have 254 ip available to be used. if the subnet mask is 255.255.255.128, then i hv 2 subnets and each subnet hs 126 ip available to be used. then totally, 252 ip is available in the network 192.168.1.0. is it correct?
the more subnet in the network, the less ip available for the hosts, but the more link stuffes are used, which means more money is used. is it correct?
normally, in the network design, more subnet is better or more pc in each subnet is better?
can i say, no subnet is the best in a network?
[img]images/smiles/icon_confused.gif [img]images/smiles/icon_confused.gif [img]images/smiles/icon_confused.gif [img]images/smiles/icon_confused.gif
It is correct that the more subnets you choose to create, the less valid IP addresses you are left with. Reason is because each subnet as a seperate network, requires its broadcast and network address.
As far as which is a better solution, having more or less subnets, or not even having one depends on your needs.
If you had a small network, with upto 25 pc's then one subnet would do the job just fine, but if the network were to grow to over 60-70 pc's then you would beed to subnet the network in order to reduce the traffic and save your bandwidth, cause the more devices on a network, the more broadcasts and other type of traffic you will have.
With this in mind, you cannot say that a network without subnets is better than one with them.