Is it better to use the 192.168.x.x or 10.x.x.x address range for a small business network?Small Business Network HardwareHow does IPv4 Subnetting Work?Can an IP address in the private range be used as a public address?IP Address Planning for our NetworkHow does IPv6 subnetting work and how does it differ from IPv4 subnetting?Is it reasonable to put all printers to another subnet?Cannot connect to external 192.168 addressImprovements for small business network?Performance Implications to Using a Full Class A SubnetCan i use the Azure DNS Service for my private network(s)?

I caught several of my students plagiarizing. Could it be my fault as a teacher?

Map one pandas column using two dictionaries

Airbnb - host wants to reduce rooms, can we get refund?

Is it cheaper to drop cargo than to land it?

Can I use 1000v rectifier diodes instead of 600v rectifier diodes?

Write to EXCEL from SQL DB using VBA script

Public Salesforce Site and Security Review

Who died in the Game of Thrones episode, "The Long Night"?

Is this homebrew race based on the Draco Volans lizard species balanced?

Is there a QGIS plugin that reclassify raster symbology based on current extent?

Short story about people living in a different time streams

Does the time required to copy a spell into a spellbook have to be consecutive, or is that just the cumulative time required?

Visa for volunteering in England

Is it the same airport YUL and YMQ in Canada?

How to creep the reader out with what seems like a normal person?

What was the state of the German rail system in 1944?

You look catfish vs You look like a catfish?

Accidentally deleted the "/usr/share" folder

Selecting a secure PIN for building access

If 1. e4 c6 is considered as a sound defense for black, why is 1. c3 so rare?

If Earth is tilted, why is Polaris always above the same spot?

Why was Germany not as successful as other Europeans in establishing overseas colonies?

Field Length Validation for Desktop Application which has maximum 1000 characters

How can I close a gap between my fence and my neighbor's that's on his side of the property line?



Is it better to use the 192.168.x.x or 10.x.x.x address range for a small business network?


Small Business Network HardwareHow does IPv4 Subnetting Work?Can an IP address in the private range be used as a public address?IP Address Planning for our NetworkHow does IPv6 subnetting work and how does it differ from IPv4 subnetting?Is it reasonable to put all printers to another subnet?Cannot connect to external 192.168 addressImprovements for small business network?Performance Implications to Using a Full Class A SubnetCan i use the Azure DNS Service for my private network(s)?






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty height:90px;width:728px;box-sizing:border-box;








40















For best performance and ease of management, is it better to use 192.168.x.x or 10.x.x.x range of addresses for a small (<50 PCs) business network?



This would correspond to a subnet of 255.255.0.0 and 255.0.0.0 respectively.










share|improve this question

















  • 8





    Don't forget, there is nothing stopping you from using 10.0.0.0/24.

    – David
    Aug 11 '09 at 14:18

















40















For best performance and ease of management, is it better to use 192.168.x.x or 10.x.x.x range of addresses for a small (<50 PCs) business network?



This would correspond to a subnet of 255.255.0.0 and 255.0.0.0 respectively.










share|improve this question

















  • 8





    Don't forget, there is nothing stopping you from using 10.0.0.0/24.

    – David
    Aug 11 '09 at 14:18













40












40








40


15






For best performance and ease of management, is it better to use 192.168.x.x or 10.x.x.x range of addresses for a small (<50 PCs) business network?



This would correspond to a subnet of 255.255.0.0 and 255.0.0.0 respectively.










share|improve this question














For best performance and ease of management, is it better to use 192.168.x.x or 10.x.x.x range of addresses for a small (<50 PCs) business network?



This would correspond to a subnet of 255.255.0.0 and 255.0.0.0 respectively.







networking subnet






share|improve this question













share|improve this question











share|improve this question




share|improve this question










asked Aug 11 '09 at 10:01









propro

301137




301137







  • 8





    Don't forget, there is nothing stopping you from using 10.0.0.0/24.

    – David
    Aug 11 '09 at 14:18












  • 8





    Don't forget, there is nothing stopping you from using 10.0.0.0/24.

    – David
    Aug 11 '09 at 14:18







8




8





Don't forget, there is nothing stopping you from using 10.0.0.0/24.

– David
Aug 11 '09 at 14:18





Don't forget, there is nothing stopping you from using 10.0.0.0/24.

– David
Aug 11 '09 at 14:18










12 Answers
12






active

oldest

votes


















35














RFC 1918 may offer you some guidance on this. At the end of it all though, you've got to design your network to suit, well, your network. If you've only got ~50 devices on the network, then any /24 (255.255.255.0 netmask) will more then suffice



What do you estimate your growth to be? Will a /24 suit in the future? That's a consideration you need to take into account



The performance side of things, I'd probably leave any performance impact to be theoretical. And management, well, that may depend on the tool used. Are you just considering IP allocation. Will DHCP work for you? Do you plan on having statically configured devices? You IP address management may start in the form of a spreadsheet. It may be more elaborate, and be database backed. You may want to tie it in to a NMS or something. There's a lot of scope in this area






share|improve this answer


















  • 5





    +1 for actually mentioning RFC1918

    – Jeremy Bouse
    Aug 11 '09 at 13:31


















29














Just because the "default" mask for a space is something large doesn't mean you have to use that mask with that space.



I would pick a subnet in the 10/8 space, like 10.1.0.0/24. This would give you room to grow in the future (ie add 10.1.1.0/24 for new space in the current site, and 10.2.0.0/24 for an alternate site).



For larger initial sites, we usually use a /20 network -- that would give you 10.0.0.0 through 10.0.15.255 to play with, or around 4094 individual IP addresses. That way you can allocate DHCP scopes in logical chunks (like 10.0.8.0 through 10.0.9.255) while allocating other specific addresses in specific places (ie we always put printers and networking gear in 10.0.15).



I would avoid using the whole 10/8 at once because if your network ever grows beyond around 4000 systems the arp noise is going to start taking a non-trivial amount of bandwidth.



I would avoid 192.168.0/24 and 192.168.1/24 because these are defaults for many consumer-grade home devices, and should you ever have to get into VPN access it will cause problems if your users home networks conflict with the "corporate" one.



I personally would avoid 192.168 totally because it doesn't flow off the fingers like the low-hanging fruit in 10.x does. On the other hand, if you have a site policy of avoiding 192.168, it makes it easy to use such addresses for local playing (ie VMware).






share|improve this answer


















  • 1





    'it doesn't flow off the fingers' exactly how I see it too.

    – fduff
    Mar 10 '15 at 8:33






  • 1





    That argument against 192.x.x.x is very true. I've come across home/work clashes in several cases because a work network used 192.168.1.x

    – chriscowley
    May 9 '15 at 7:37











  • I have just that problem at work. We use the 10.1 subset but some client sites exposed within our intranet use 192.168, the result being that when I work from home I can resolve all domains but cannot access some sites without doing SSH-in-RDP.

    – Thomas
    Jul 28 '15 at 20:38


















14














There will be no difference for a such small network.

Just note that 172.16/12 is also reserved for private use. (172.16.0.0 to 172.31.255.255)
(see RFC1918)






share|improve this answer


















  • 4





    +1 I also use 172.16.16.0/24 for home-installations

    – ThorstenS
    Aug 11 '09 at 15:18


















12














Use 10.X.X.X it is often generally faster to type than 192.168.X.X. Other than that, there is no different except the number of supported hosts, not going into VLANs.






share|improve this answer


















  • 5





    +1 for ease of typing ;-)

    – Dayton Brown
    Aug 11 '09 at 14:22


















10














As everyone has mentioned, there is no difference between them.



You can carve the address space as small or as large as you want. You want as small as you need, but not so small to make it hard to expand.



The only reason to pick one over the other is if you connect to another network, either by a VPN or by a direct link. You will run into trouble if you have the same address range, so consider what networks you are likely to connect to. Readdressing is not a task to be taken lightly.






share|improve this answer























  • Sums up my feelings on the subject. +1

    – John Gardeniers
    Aug 11 '09 at 11:18






  • 2





    Pick something like 192.168.79.0/24 IMO. Chances are the networks you will have to VPN to will be 192.168.0.0, 192.168.1.0. 172.16 is also a nice touch.

    – Kyle Hodgson
    Aug 11 '09 at 11:41


















5














There is no difference at all for such a small network - certainly any performance differences would be highly theoretical and miniscule.






share|improve this answer


















  • 4





    Not even theoretical. There is no difference.

    – John Gardeniers
    Aug 11 '09 at 11:15











  • I said that because there's bound to be someone who will argue that there will be a TINY difference if maths/processing used for one over the other - people can be like that, but you're right.

    – Chopper3
    Aug 11 '09 at 11:47






  • 6





    this is not true at all, every network tool that will try to discover hosts on the net by scan will try to perform a scan of the entire net. This leeds to geological scan times even for a very small number of effectively present hosts if the netmask used is too "permissive". LEt choose the smallest net you can live with!

    – drAlberT
    Aug 11 '09 at 11:48






  • 1





    great point AlberT. Some examples are finding out network printers via broadcast.

    – hayalci
    Aug 11 '09 at 13:11


















1














If you have less than 50 PC use a /24 mask. I would go for an 192.168.1.0/24 series out of convention. 192.168.x.x is reserved for class C subnet and for a /24 that would be appropriate.



raj






share|improve this answer






























    1














    There's no obvious advantage or disadvantage choosing a range out of 10.0.0.0/8, 172.16.0.0/12 or 192.168.0.0/24 these days (with almost everything capable of using CIDR). If you're looking at a corporate merger down the line, there MAY be some advantage of picking a random starting point in one of the two larger blocks, as that MAY mean you won't have to renumber. However, planning for that isn't really a priority.






    share|improve this answer






























      1














      The real reason to go with 10.x.x.x for a small business network is, as David touches on, is VPN access to the system.



      192.168.1.x is a very commonly used network. Avoid it.






      share|improve this answer






























        0














        It does not mather what network you use no, but there is a advatage in NOT using 10.0.0.X or 192.16.45.x. If you use those networks it can easly create issues if you for some reason need a VPN system, and the network you dail has the same network mask as you.






        share|improve this answer






























          0














          That depend on your need :

          192.168.x.x is a Private Internet address Class C that support 65534 hosts

          10.x.x.x is a Private Internet address Class A that support 16777214 hosts.



          In my network i have about 1000 targets and i use the Class C of address.

          May be for some security view you can use 10.x.x.x/24 if you have less that 50 targets.
          please find here a similar post






          share|improve this answer




















          • 1





            Almost. 192.168.0.0/16 256 (or 254) Class C networks, each able to support 254 devices. However, the actual "class" of network is mostly a moot point in this day and age.

            – Vatine
            Aug 11 '09 at 17:44






          • 1





            Indeed, CIDR (Classless Inter-Domain Routing) was promulgated something like 15 years ago.

            – pjz
            Feb 10 '12 at 15:11


















          0














          Either/or, but just make sure that you throw everything you may have ever heard about classes out of the nearest window and use CIDR instead.



          With 50 hosts you might even be able to use a 25 bit netmask which would help avoid the VPN issues mentioned by others (I doubt if many networks out there use 25 bit netmasks).






          share|improve this answer























            Your Answer








            StackExchange.ready(function()
            var channelOptions =
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "2"
            ;
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
            createEditor();
            );

            else
            createEditor();

            );

            function createEditor()
            StackExchange.prepareEditor(
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: true,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: 10,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader:
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            ,
            onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            );



            );













            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fserverfault.com%2fquestions%2f52631%2fis-it-better-to-use-the-192-168-x-x-or-10-x-x-x-address-range-for-a-small-busine%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            12 Answers
            12






            active

            oldest

            votes








            12 Answers
            12






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            35














            RFC 1918 may offer you some guidance on this. At the end of it all though, you've got to design your network to suit, well, your network. If you've only got ~50 devices on the network, then any /24 (255.255.255.0 netmask) will more then suffice



            What do you estimate your growth to be? Will a /24 suit in the future? That's a consideration you need to take into account



            The performance side of things, I'd probably leave any performance impact to be theoretical. And management, well, that may depend on the tool used. Are you just considering IP allocation. Will DHCP work for you? Do you plan on having statically configured devices? You IP address management may start in the form of a spreadsheet. It may be more elaborate, and be database backed. You may want to tie it in to a NMS or something. There's a lot of scope in this area






            share|improve this answer


















            • 5





              +1 for actually mentioning RFC1918

              – Jeremy Bouse
              Aug 11 '09 at 13:31















            35














            RFC 1918 may offer you some guidance on this. At the end of it all though, you've got to design your network to suit, well, your network. If you've only got ~50 devices on the network, then any /24 (255.255.255.0 netmask) will more then suffice



            What do you estimate your growth to be? Will a /24 suit in the future? That's a consideration you need to take into account



            The performance side of things, I'd probably leave any performance impact to be theoretical. And management, well, that may depend on the tool used. Are you just considering IP allocation. Will DHCP work for you? Do you plan on having statically configured devices? You IP address management may start in the form of a spreadsheet. It may be more elaborate, and be database backed. You may want to tie it in to a NMS or something. There's a lot of scope in this area






            share|improve this answer


















            • 5





              +1 for actually mentioning RFC1918

              – Jeremy Bouse
              Aug 11 '09 at 13:31













            35












            35








            35







            RFC 1918 may offer you some guidance on this. At the end of it all though, you've got to design your network to suit, well, your network. If you've only got ~50 devices on the network, then any /24 (255.255.255.0 netmask) will more then suffice



            What do you estimate your growth to be? Will a /24 suit in the future? That's a consideration you need to take into account



            The performance side of things, I'd probably leave any performance impact to be theoretical. And management, well, that may depend on the tool used. Are you just considering IP allocation. Will DHCP work for you? Do you plan on having statically configured devices? You IP address management may start in the form of a spreadsheet. It may be more elaborate, and be database backed. You may want to tie it in to a NMS or something. There's a lot of scope in this area






            share|improve this answer













            RFC 1918 may offer you some guidance on this. At the end of it all though, you've got to design your network to suit, well, your network. If you've only got ~50 devices on the network, then any /24 (255.255.255.0 netmask) will more then suffice



            What do you estimate your growth to be? Will a /24 suit in the future? That's a consideration you need to take into account



            The performance side of things, I'd probably leave any performance impact to be theoretical. And management, well, that may depend on the tool used. Are you just considering IP allocation. Will DHCP work for you? Do you plan on having statically configured devices? You IP address management may start in the form of a spreadsheet. It may be more elaborate, and be database backed. You may want to tie it in to a NMS or something. There's a lot of scope in this area







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered Aug 11 '09 at 10:17









            Ben QuickBen Quick

            1,205188




            1,205188







            • 5





              +1 for actually mentioning RFC1918

              – Jeremy Bouse
              Aug 11 '09 at 13:31












            • 5





              +1 for actually mentioning RFC1918

              – Jeremy Bouse
              Aug 11 '09 at 13:31







            5




            5





            +1 for actually mentioning RFC1918

            – Jeremy Bouse
            Aug 11 '09 at 13:31





            +1 for actually mentioning RFC1918

            – Jeremy Bouse
            Aug 11 '09 at 13:31













            29














            Just because the "default" mask for a space is something large doesn't mean you have to use that mask with that space.



            I would pick a subnet in the 10/8 space, like 10.1.0.0/24. This would give you room to grow in the future (ie add 10.1.1.0/24 for new space in the current site, and 10.2.0.0/24 for an alternate site).



            For larger initial sites, we usually use a /20 network -- that would give you 10.0.0.0 through 10.0.15.255 to play with, or around 4094 individual IP addresses. That way you can allocate DHCP scopes in logical chunks (like 10.0.8.0 through 10.0.9.255) while allocating other specific addresses in specific places (ie we always put printers and networking gear in 10.0.15).



            I would avoid using the whole 10/8 at once because if your network ever grows beyond around 4000 systems the arp noise is going to start taking a non-trivial amount of bandwidth.



            I would avoid 192.168.0/24 and 192.168.1/24 because these are defaults for many consumer-grade home devices, and should you ever have to get into VPN access it will cause problems if your users home networks conflict with the "corporate" one.



            I personally would avoid 192.168 totally because it doesn't flow off the fingers like the low-hanging fruit in 10.x does. On the other hand, if you have a site policy of avoiding 192.168, it makes it easy to use such addresses for local playing (ie VMware).






            share|improve this answer


















            • 1





              'it doesn't flow off the fingers' exactly how I see it too.

              – fduff
              Mar 10 '15 at 8:33






            • 1





              That argument against 192.x.x.x is very true. I've come across home/work clashes in several cases because a work network used 192.168.1.x

              – chriscowley
              May 9 '15 at 7:37











            • I have just that problem at work. We use the 10.1 subset but some client sites exposed within our intranet use 192.168, the result being that when I work from home I can resolve all domains but cannot access some sites without doing SSH-in-RDP.

              – Thomas
              Jul 28 '15 at 20:38















            29














            Just because the "default" mask for a space is something large doesn't mean you have to use that mask with that space.



            I would pick a subnet in the 10/8 space, like 10.1.0.0/24. This would give you room to grow in the future (ie add 10.1.1.0/24 for new space in the current site, and 10.2.0.0/24 for an alternate site).



            For larger initial sites, we usually use a /20 network -- that would give you 10.0.0.0 through 10.0.15.255 to play with, or around 4094 individual IP addresses. That way you can allocate DHCP scopes in logical chunks (like 10.0.8.0 through 10.0.9.255) while allocating other specific addresses in specific places (ie we always put printers and networking gear in 10.0.15).



            I would avoid using the whole 10/8 at once because if your network ever grows beyond around 4000 systems the arp noise is going to start taking a non-trivial amount of bandwidth.



            I would avoid 192.168.0/24 and 192.168.1/24 because these are defaults for many consumer-grade home devices, and should you ever have to get into VPN access it will cause problems if your users home networks conflict with the "corporate" one.



            I personally would avoid 192.168 totally because it doesn't flow off the fingers like the low-hanging fruit in 10.x does. On the other hand, if you have a site policy of avoiding 192.168, it makes it easy to use such addresses for local playing (ie VMware).






            share|improve this answer


















            • 1





              'it doesn't flow off the fingers' exactly how I see it too.

              – fduff
              Mar 10 '15 at 8:33






            • 1





              That argument against 192.x.x.x is very true. I've come across home/work clashes in several cases because a work network used 192.168.1.x

              – chriscowley
              May 9 '15 at 7:37











            • I have just that problem at work. We use the 10.1 subset but some client sites exposed within our intranet use 192.168, the result being that when I work from home I can resolve all domains but cannot access some sites without doing SSH-in-RDP.

              – Thomas
              Jul 28 '15 at 20:38













            29












            29








            29







            Just because the "default" mask for a space is something large doesn't mean you have to use that mask with that space.



            I would pick a subnet in the 10/8 space, like 10.1.0.0/24. This would give you room to grow in the future (ie add 10.1.1.0/24 for new space in the current site, and 10.2.0.0/24 for an alternate site).



            For larger initial sites, we usually use a /20 network -- that would give you 10.0.0.0 through 10.0.15.255 to play with, or around 4094 individual IP addresses. That way you can allocate DHCP scopes in logical chunks (like 10.0.8.0 through 10.0.9.255) while allocating other specific addresses in specific places (ie we always put printers and networking gear in 10.0.15).



            I would avoid using the whole 10/8 at once because if your network ever grows beyond around 4000 systems the arp noise is going to start taking a non-trivial amount of bandwidth.



            I would avoid 192.168.0/24 and 192.168.1/24 because these are defaults for many consumer-grade home devices, and should you ever have to get into VPN access it will cause problems if your users home networks conflict with the "corporate" one.



            I personally would avoid 192.168 totally because it doesn't flow off the fingers like the low-hanging fruit in 10.x does. On the other hand, if you have a site policy of avoiding 192.168, it makes it easy to use such addresses for local playing (ie VMware).






            share|improve this answer













            Just because the "default" mask for a space is something large doesn't mean you have to use that mask with that space.



            I would pick a subnet in the 10/8 space, like 10.1.0.0/24. This would give you room to grow in the future (ie add 10.1.1.0/24 for new space in the current site, and 10.2.0.0/24 for an alternate site).



            For larger initial sites, we usually use a /20 network -- that would give you 10.0.0.0 through 10.0.15.255 to play with, or around 4094 individual IP addresses. That way you can allocate DHCP scopes in logical chunks (like 10.0.8.0 through 10.0.9.255) while allocating other specific addresses in specific places (ie we always put printers and networking gear in 10.0.15).



            I would avoid using the whole 10/8 at once because if your network ever grows beyond around 4000 systems the arp noise is going to start taking a non-trivial amount of bandwidth.



            I would avoid 192.168.0/24 and 192.168.1/24 because these are defaults for many consumer-grade home devices, and should you ever have to get into VPN access it will cause problems if your users home networks conflict with the "corporate" one.



            I personally would avoid 192.168 totally because it doesn't flow off the fingers like the low-hanging fruit in 10.x does. On the other hand, if you have a site policy of avoiding 192.168, it makes it easy to use such addresses for local playing (ie VMware).







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered Aug 11 '09 at 16:06









            David MackintoshDavid Mackintosh

            12.9k54074




            12.9k54074







            • 1





              'it doesn't flow off the fingers' exactly how I see it too.

              – fduff
              Mar 10 '15 at 8:33






            • 1





              That argument against 192.x.x.x is very true. I've come across home/work clashes in several cases because a work network used 192.168.1.x

              – chriscowley
              May 9 '15 at 7:37











            • I have just that problem at work. We use the 10.1 subset but some client sites exposed within our intranet use 192.168, the result being that when I work from home I can resolve all domains but cannot access some sites without doing SSH-in-RDP.

              – Thomas
              Jul 28 '15 at 20:38












            • 1





              'it doesn't flow off the fingers' exactly how I see it too.

              – fduff
              Mar 10 '15 at 8:33






            • 1





              That argument against 192.x.x.x is very true. I've come across home/work clashes in several cases because a work network used 192.168.1.x

              – chriscowley
              May 9 '15 at 7:37











            • I have just that problem at work. We use the 10.1 subset but some client sites exposed within our intranet use 192.168, the result being that when I work from home I can resolve all domains but cannot access some sites without doing SSH-in-RDP.

              – Thomas
              Jul 28 '15 at 20:38







            1




            1





            'it doesn't flow off the fingers' exactly how I see it too.

            – fduff
            Mar 10 '15 at 8:33





            'it doesn't flow off the fingers' exactly how I see it too.

            – fduff
            Mar 10 '15 at 8:33




            1




            1





            That argument against 192.x.x.x is very true. I've come across home/work clashes in several cases because a work network used 192.168.1.x

            – chriscowley
            May 9 '15 at 7:37





            That argument against 192.x.x.x is very true. I've come across home/work clashes in several cases because a work network used 192.168.1.x

            – chriscowley
            May 9 '15 at 7:37













            I have just that problem at work. We use the 10.1 subset but some client sites exposed within our intranet use 192.168, the result being that when I work from home I can resolve all domains but cannot access some sites without doing SSH-in-RDP.

            – Thomas
            Jul 28 '15 at 20:38





            I have just that problem at work. We use the 10.1 subset but some client sites exposed within our intranet use 192.168, the result being that when I work from home I can resolve all domains but cannot access some sites without doing SSH-in-RDP.

            – Thomas
            Jul 28 '15 at 20:38











            14














            There will be no difference for a such small network.

            Just note that 172.16/12 is also reserved for private use. (172.16.0.0 to 172.31.255.255)
            (see RFC1918)






            share|improve this answer


















            • 4





              +1 I also use 172.16.16.0/24 for home-installations

              – ThorstenS
              Aug 11 '09 at 15:18















            14














            There will be no difference for a such small network.

            Just note that 172.16/12 is also reserved for private use. (172.16.0.0 to 172.31.255.255)
            (see RFC1918)






            share|improve this answer


















            • 4





              +1 I also use 172.16.16.0/24 for home-installations

              – ThorstenS
              Aug 11 '09 at 15:18













            14












            14








            14







            There will be no difference for a such small network.

            Just note that 172.16/12 is also reserved for private use. (172.16.0.0 to 172.31.255.255)
            (see RFC1918)






            share|improve this answer













            There will be no difference for a such small network.

            Just note that 172.16/12 is also reserved for private use. (172.16.0.0 to 172.31.255.255)
            (see RFC1918)







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered Aug 11 '09 at 10:15









            radiusradius

            8,9201943




            8,9201943







            • 4





              +1 I also use 172.16.16.0/24 for home-installations

              – ThorstenS
              Aug 11 '09 at 15:18












            • 4





              +1 I also use 172.16.16.0/24 for home-installations

              – ThorstenS
              Aug 11 '09 at 15:18







            4




            4





            +1 I also use 172.16.16.0/24 for home-installations

            – ThorstenS
            Aug 11 '09 at 15:18





            +1 I also use 172.16.16.0/24 for home-installations

            – ThorstenS
            Aug 11 '09 at 15:18











            12














            Use 10.X.X.X it is often generally faster to type than 192.168.X.X. Other than that, there is no different except the number of supported hosts, not going into VLANs.






            share|improve this answer


















            • 5





              +1 for ease of typing ;-)

              – Dayton Brown
              Aug 11 '09 at 14:22















            12














            Use 10.X.X.X it is often generally faster to type than 192.168.X.X. Other than that, there is no different except the number of supported hosts, not going into VLANs.






            share|improve this answer


















            • 5





              +1 for ease of typing ;-)

              – Dayton Brown
              Aug 11 '09 at 14:22













            12












            12








            12







            Use 10.X.X.X it is often generally faster to type than 192.168.X.X. Other than that, there is no different except the number of supported hosts, not going into VLANs.






            share|improve this answer













            Use 10.X.X.X it is often generally faster to type than 192.168.X.X. Other than that, there is no different except the number of supported hosts, not going into VLANs.







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered Aug 11 '09 at 12:56









            David RickmanDavid Rickman

            3,1351316




            3,1351316







            • 5





              +1 for ease of typing ;-)

              – Dayton Brown
              Aug 11 '09 at 14:22












            • 5





              +1 for ease of typing ;-)

              – Dayton Brown
              Aug 11 '09 at 14:22







            5




            5





            +1 for ease of typing ;-)

            – Dayton Brown
            Aug 11 '09 at 14:22





            +1 for ease of typing ;-)

            – Dayton Brown
            Aug 11 '09 at 14:22











            10














            As everyone has mentioned, there is no difference between them.



            You can carve the address space as small or as large as you want. You want as small as you need, but not so small to make it hard to expand.



            The only reason to pick one over the other is if you connect to another network, either by a VPN or by a direct link. You will run into trouble if you have the same address range, so consider what networks you are likely to connect to. Readdressing is not a task to be taken lightly.






            share|improve this answer























            • Sums up my feelings on the subject. +1

              – John Gardeniers
              Aug 11 '09 at 11:18






            • 2





              Pick something like 192.168.79.0/24 IMO. Chances are the networks you will have to VPN to will be 192.168.0.0, 192.168.1.0. 172.16 is also a nice touch.

              – Kyle Hodgson
              Aug 11 '09 at 11:41















            10














            As everyone has mentioned, there is no difference between them.



            You can carve the address space as small or as large as you want. You want as small as you need, but not so small to make it hard to expand.



            The only reason to pick one over the other is if you connect to another network, either by a VPN or by a direct link. You will run into trouble if you have the same address range, so consider what networks you are likely to connect to. Readdressing is not a task to be taken lightly.






            share|improve this answer























            • Sums up my feelings on the subject. +1

              – John Gardeniers
              Aug 11 '09 at 11:18






            • 2





              Pick something like 192.168.79.0/24 IMO. Chances are the networks you will have to VPN to will be 192.168.0.0, 192.168.1.0. 172.16 is also a nice touch.

              – Kyle Hodgson
              Aug 11 '09 at 11:41













            10












            10








            10







            As everyone has mentioned, there is no difference between them.



            You can carve the address space as small or as large as you want. You want as small as you need, but not so small to make it hard to expand.



            The only reason to pick one over the other is if you connect to another network, either by a VPN or by a direct link. You will run into trouble if you have the same address range, so consider what networks you are likely to connect to. Readdressing is not a task to be taken lightly.






            share|improve this answer













            As everyone has mentioned, there is no difference between them.



            You can carve the address space as small or as large as you want. You want as small as you need, but not so small to make it hard to expand.



            The only reason to pick one over the other is if you connect to another network, either by a VPN or by a direct link. You will run into trouble if you have the same address range, so consider what networks you are likely to connect to. Readdressing is not a task to be taken lightly.







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered Aug 11 '09 at 10:56









            David PashleyDavid Pashley

            21k13368




            21k13368












            • Sums up my feelings on the subject. +1

              – John Gardeniers
              Aug 11 '09 at 11:18






            • 2





              Pick something like 192.168.79.0/24 IMO. Chances are the networks you will have to VPN to will be 192.168.0.0, 192.168.1.0. 172.16 is also a nice touch.

              – Kyle Hodgson
              Aug 11 '09 at 11:41

















            • Sums up my feelings on the subject. +1

              – John Gardeniers
              Aug 11 '09 at 11:18






            • 2





              Pick something like 192.168.79.0/24 IMO. Chances are the networks you will have to VPN to will be 192.168.0.0, 192.168.1.0. 172.16 is also a nice touch.

              – Kyle Hodgson
              Aug 11 '09 at 11:41
















            Sums up my feelings on the subject. +1

            – John Gardeniers
            Aug 11 '09 at 11:18





            Sums up my feelings on the subject. +1

            – John Gardeniers
            Aug 11 '09 at 11:18




            2




            2





            Pick something like 192.168.79.0/24 IMO. Chances are the networks you will have to VPN to will be 192.168.0.0, 192.168.1.0. 172.16 is also a nice touch.

            – Kyle Hodgson
            Aug 11 '09 at 11:41





            Pick something like 192.168.79.0/24 IMO. Chances are the networks you will have to VPN to will be 192.168.0.0, 192.168.1.0. 172.16 is also a nice touch.

            – Kyle Hodgson
            Aug 11 '09 at 11:41











            5














            There is no difference at all for such a small network - certainly any performance differences would be highly theoretical and miniscule.






            share|improve this answer


















            • 4





              Not even theoretical. There is no difference.

              – John Gardeniers
              Aug 11 '09 at 11:15











            • I said that because there's bound to be someone who will argue that there will be a TINY difference if maths/processing used for one over the other - people can be like that, but you're right.

              – Chopper3
              Aug 11 '09 at 11:47






            • 6





              this is not true at all, every network tool that will try to discover hosts on the net by scan will try to perform a scan of the entire net. This leeds to geological scan times even for a very small number of effectively present hosts if the netmask used is too "permissive". LEt choose the smallest net you can live with!

              – drAlberT
              Aug 11 '09 at 11:48






            • 1





              great point AlberT. Some examples are finding out network printers via broadcast.

              – hayalci
              Aug 11 '09 at 13:11















            5














            There is no difference at all for such a small network - certainly any performance differences would be highly theoretical and miniscule.






            share|improve this answer


















            • 4





              Not even theoretical. There is no difference.

              – John Gardeniers
              Aug 11 '09 at 11:15











            • I said that because there's bound to be someone who will argue that there will be a TINY difference if maths/processing used for one over the other - people can be like that, but you're right.

              – Chopper3
              Aug 11 '09 at 11:47






            • 6





              this is not true at all, every network tool that will try to discover hosts on the net by scan will try to perform a scan of the entire net. This leeds to geological scan times even for a very small number of effectively present hosts if the netmask used is too "permissive". LEt choose the smallest net you can live with!

              – drAlberT
              Aug 11 '09 at 11:48






            • 1





              great point AlberT. Some examples are finding out network printers via broadcast.

              – hayalci
              Aug 11 '09 at 13:11













            5












            5








            5







            There is no difference at all for such a small network - certainly any performance differences would be highly theoretical and miniscule.






            share|improve this answer













            There is no difference at all for such a small network - certainly any performance differences would be highly theoretical and miniscule.







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered Aug 11 '09 at 10:04









            Chopper3Chopper3

            94.9k999227




            94.9k999227







            • 4





              Not even theoretical. There is no difference.

              – John Gardeniers
              Aug 11 '09 at 11:15











            • I said that because there's bound to be someone who will argue that there will be a TINY difference if maths/processing used for one over the other - people can be like that, but you're right.

              – Chopper3
              Aug 11 '09 at 11:47






            • 6





              this is not true at all, every network tool that will try to discover hosts on the net by scan will try to perform a scan of the entire net. This leeds to geological scan times even for a very small number of effectively present hosts if the netmask used is too "permissive". LEt choose the smallest net you can live with!

              – drAlberT
              Aug 11 '09 at 11:48






            • 1





              great point AlberT. Some examples are finding out network printers via broadcast.

              – hayalci
              Aug 11 '09 at 13:11












            • 4





              Not even theoretical. There is no difference.

              – John Gardeniers
              Aug 11 '09 at 11:15











            • I said that because there's bound to be someone who will argue that there will be a TINY difference if maths/processing used for one over the other - people can be like that, but you're right.

              – Chopper3
              Aug 11 '09 at 11:47






            • 6





              this is not true at all, every network tool that will try to discover hosts on the net by scan will try to perform a scan of the entire net. This leeds to geological scan times even for a very small number of effectively present hosts if the netmask used is too "permissive". LEt choose the smallest net you can live with!

              – drAlberT
              Aug 11 '09 at 11:48






            • 1





              great point AlberT. Some examples are finding out network printers via broadcast.

              – hayalci
              Aug 11 '09 at 13:11







            4




            4





            Not even theoretical. There is no difference.

            – John Gardeniers
            Aug 11 '09 at 11:15





            Not even theoretical. There is no difference.

            – John Gardeniers
            Aug 11 '09 at 11:15













            I said that because there's bound to be someone who will argue that there will be a TINY difference if maths/processing used for one over the other - people can be like that, but you're right.

            – Chopper3
            Aug 11 '09 at 11:47





            I said that because there's bound to be someone who will argue that there will be a TINY difference if maths/processing used for one over the other - people can be like that, but you're right.

            – Chopper3
            Aug 11 '09 at 11:47




            6




            6





            this is not true at all, every network tool that will try to discover hosts on the net by scan will try to perform a scan of the entire net. This leeds to geological scan times even for a very small number of effectively present hosts if the netmask used is too "permissive". LEt choose the smallest net you can live with!

            – drAlberT
            Aug 11 '09 at 11:48





            this is not true at all, every network tool that will try to discover hosts on the net by scan will try to perform a scan of the entire net. This leeds to geological scan times even for a very small number of effectively present hosts if the netmask used is too "permissive". LEt choose the smallest net you can live with!

            – drAlberT
            Aug 11 '09 at 11:48




            1




            1





            great point AlberT. Some examples are finding out network printers via broadcast.

            – hayalci
            Aug 11 '09 at 13:11





            great point AlberT. Some examples are finding out network printers via broadcast.

            – hayalci
            Aug 11 '09 at 13:11











            1














            If you have less than 50 PC use a /24 mask. I would go for an 192.168.1.0/24 series out of convention. 192.168.x.x is reserved for class C subnet and for a /24 that would be appropriate.



            raj






            share|improve this answer



























              1














              If you have less than 50 PC use a /24 mask. I would go for an 192.168.1.0/24 series out of convention. 192.168.x.x is reserved for class C subnet and for a /24 that would be appropriate.



              raj






              share|improve this answer

























                1












                1








                1







                If you have less than 50 PC use a /24 mask. I would go for an 192.168.1.0/24 series out of convention. 192.168.x.x is reserved for class C subnet and for a /24 that would be appropriate.



                raj






                share|improve this answer













                If you have less than 50 PC use a /24 mask. I would go for an 192.168.1.0/24 series out of convention. 192.168.x.x is reserved for class C subnet and for a /24 that would be appropriate.



                raj







                share|improve this answer












                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer










                answered Aug 11 '09 at 10:06









                Rajkumar SRajkumar S

                3031611




                3031611





















                    1














                    There's no obvious advantage or disadvantage choosing a range out of 10.0.0.0/8, 172.16.0.0/12 or 192.168.0.0/24 these days (with almost everything capable of using CIDR). If you're looking at a corporate merger down the line, there MAY be some advantage of picking a random starting point in one of the two larger blocks, as that MAY mean you won't have to renumber. However, planning for that isn't really a priority.






                    share|improve this answer



























                      1














                      There's no obvious advantage or disadvantage choosing a range out of 10.0.0.0/8, 172.16.0.0/12 or 192.168.0.0/24 these days (with almost everything capable of using CIDR). If you're looking at a corporate merger down the line, there MAY be some advantage of picking a random starting point in one of the two larger blocks, as that MAY mean you won't have to renumber. However, planning for that isn't really a priority.






                      share|improve this answer

























                        1












                        1








                        1







                        There's no obvious advantage or disadvantage choosing a range out of 10.0.0.0/8, 172.16.0.0/12 or 192.168.0.0/24 these days (with almost everything capable of using CIDR). If you're looking at a corporate merger down the line, there MAY be some advantage of picking a random starting point in one of the two larger blocks, as that MAY mean you won't have to renumber. However, planning for that isn't really a priority.






                        share|improve this answer













                        There's no obvious advantage or disadvantage choosing a range out of 10.0.0.0/8, 172.16.0.0/12 or 192.168.0.0/24 these days (with almost everything capable of using CIDR). If you're looking at a corporate merger down the line, there MAY be some advantage of picking a random starting point in one of the two larger blocks, as that MAY mean you won't have to renumber. However, planning for that isn't really a priority.







                        share|improve this answer












                        share|improve this answer



                        share|improve this answer










                        answered Aug 11 '09 at 10:22









                        VatineVatine

                        4,8901622




                        4,8901622





















                            1














                            The real reason to go with 10.x.x.x for a small business network is, as David touches on, is VPN access to the system.



                            192.168.1.x is a very commonly used network. Avoid it.






                            share|improve this answer



























                              1














                              The real reason to go with 10.x.x.x for a small business network is, as David touches on, is VPN access to the system.



                              192.168.1.x is a very commonly used network. Avoid it.






                              share|improve this answer

























                                1












                                1








                                1







                                The real reason to go with 10.x.x.x for a small business network is, as David touches on, is VPN access to the system.



                                192.168.1.x is a very commonly used network. Avoid it.






                                share|improve this answer













                                The real reason to go with 10.x.x.x for a small business network is, as David touches on, is VPN access to the system.



                                192.168.1.x is a very commonly used network. Avoid it.







                                share|improve this answer












                                share|improve this answer



                                share|improve this answer










                                answered Aug 11 '09 at 16:19







                                anon




























                                    0














                                    It does not mather what network you use no, but there is a advatage in NOT using 10.0.0.X or 192.16.45.x. If you use those networks it can easly create issues if you for some reason need a VPN system, and the network you dail has the same network mask as you.






                                    share|improve this answer



























                                      0














                                      It does not mather what network you use no, but there is a advatage in NOT using 10.0.0.X or 192.16.45.x. If you use those networks it can easly create issues if you for some reason need a VPN system, and the network you dail has the same network mask as you.






                                      share|improve this answer

























                                        0












                                        0








                                        0







                                        It does not mather what network you use no, but there is a advatage in NOT using 10.0.0.X or 192.16.45.x. If you use those networks it can easly create issues if you for some reason need a VPN system, and the network you dail has the same network mask as you.






                                        share|improve this answer













                                        It does not mather what network you use no, but there is a advatage in NOT using 10.0.0.X or 192.16.45.x. If you use those networks it can easly create issues if you for some reason need a VPN system, and the network you dail has the same network mask as you.







                                        share|improve this answer












                                        share|improve this answer



                                        share|improve this answer










                                        answered Aug 11 '09 at 10:09









                                        EKSEKS

                                        440514




                                        440514





















                                            0














                                            That depend on your need :

                                            192.168.x.x is a Private Internet address Class C that support 65534 hosts

                                            10.x.x.x is a Private Internet address Class A that support 16777214 hosts.



                                            In my network i have about 1000 targets and i use the Class C of address.

                                            May be for some security view you can use 10.x.x.x/24 if you have less that 50 targets.
                                            please find here a similar post






                                            share|improve this answer




















                                            • 1





                                              Almost. 192.168.0.0/16 256 (or 254) Class C networks, each able to support 254 devices. However, the actual "class" of network is mostly a moot point in this day and age.

                                              – Vatine
                                              Aug 11 '09 at 17:44






                                            • 1





                                              Indeed, CIDR (Classless Inter-Domain Routing) was promulgated something like 15 years ago.

                                              – pjz
                                              Feb 10 '12 at 15:11















                                            0














                                            That depend on your need :

                                            192.168.x.x is a Private Internet address Class C that support 65534 hosts

                                            10.x.x.x is a Private Internet address Class A that support 16777214 hosts.



                                            In my network i have about 1000 targets and i use the Class C of address.

                                            May be for some security view you can use 10.x.x.x/24 if you have less that 50 targets.
                                            please find here a similar post






                                            share|improve this answer




















                                            • 1





                                              Almost. 192.168.0.0/16 256 (or 254) Class C networks, each able to support 254 devices. However, the actual "class" of network is mostly a moot point in this day and age.

                                              – Vatine
                                              Aug 11 '09 at 17:44






                                            • 1





                                              Indeed, CIDR (Classless Inter-Domain Routing) was promulgated something like 15 years ago.

                                              – pjz
                                              Feb 10 '12 at 15:11













                                            0












                                            0








                                            0







                                            That depend on your need :

                                            192.168.x.x is a Private Internet address Class C that support 65534 hosts

                                            10.x.x.x is a Private Internet address Class A that support 16777214 hosts.



                                            In my network i have about 1000 targets and i use the Class C of address.

                                            May be for some security view you can use 10.x.x.x/24 if you have less that 50 targets.
                                            please find here a similar post






                                            share|improve this answer















                                            That depend on your need :

                                            192.168.x.x is a Private Internet address Class C that support 65534 hosts

                                            10.x.x.x is a Private Internet address Class A that support 16777214 hosts.



                                            In my network i have about 1000 targets and i use the Class C of address.

                                            May be for some security view you can use 10.x.x.x/24 if you have less that 50 targets.
                                            please find here a similar post







                                            share|improve this answer














                                            share|improve this answer



                                            share|improve this answer








                                            edited Apr 13 '17 at 12:14









                                            Community

                                            1




                                            1










                                            answered Aug 11 '09 at 10:10









                                            Ali MezganiAli Mezgani

                                            3,50111534




                                            3,50111534







                                            • 1





                                              Almost. 192.168.0.0/16 256 (or 254) Class C networks, each able to support 254 devices. However, the actual "class" of network is mostly a moot point in this day and age.

                                              – Vatine
                                              Aug 11 '09 at 17:44






                                            • 1





                                              Indeed, CIDR (Classless Inter-Domain Routing) was promulgated something like 15 years ago.

                                              – pjz
                                              Feb 10 '12 at 15:11












                                            • 1





                                              Almost. 192.168.0.0/16 256 (or 254) Class C networks, each able to support 254 devices. However, the actual "class" of network is mostly a moot point in this day and age.

                                              – Vatine
                                              Aug 11 '09 at 17:44






                                            • 1





                                              Indeed, CIDR (Classless Inter-Domain Routing) was promulgated something like 15 years ago.

                                              – pjz
                                              Feb 10 '12 at 15:11







                                            1




                                            1





                                            Almost. 192.168.0.0/16 256 (or 254) Class C networks, each able to support 254 devices. However, the actual "class" of network is mostly a moot point in this day and age.

                                            – Vatine
                                            Aug 11 '09 at 17:44





                                            Almost. 192.168.0.0/16 256 (or 254) Class C networks, each able to support 254 devices. However, the actual "class" of network is mostly a moot point in this day and age.

                                            – Vatine
                                            Aug 11 '09 at 17:44




                                            1




                                            1





                                            Indeed, CIDR (Classless Inter-Domain Routing) was promulgated something like 15 years ago.

                                            – pjz
                                            Feb 10 '12 at 15:11





                                            Indeed, CIDR (Classless Inter-Domain Routing) was promulgated something like 15 years ago.

                                            – pjz
                                            Feb 10 '12 at 15:11











                                            0














                                            Either/or, but just make sure that you throw everything you may have ever heard about classes out of the nearest window and use CIDR instead.



                                            With 50 hosts you might even be able to use a 25 bit netmask which would help avoid the VPN issues mentioned by others (I doubt if many networks out there use 25 bit netmasks).






                                            share|improve this answer



























                                              0














                                              Either/or, but just make sure that you throw everything you may have ever heard about classes out of the nearest window and use CIDR instead.



                                              With 50 hosts you might even be able to use a 25 bit netmask which would help avoid the VPN issues mentioned by others (I doubt if many networks out there use 25 bit netmasks).






                                              share|improve this answer

























                                                0












                                                0








                                                0







                                                Either/or, but just make sure that you throw everything you may have ever heard about classes out of the nearest window and use CIDR instead.



                                                With 50 hosts you might even be able to use a 25 bit netmask which would help avoid the VPN issues mentioned by others (I doubt if many networks out there use 25 bit netmasks).






                                                share|improve this answer













                                                Either/or, but just make sure that you throw everything you may have ever heard about classes out of the nearest window and use CIDR instead.



                                                With 50 hosts you might even be able to use a 25 bit netmask which would help avoid the VPN issues mentioned by others (I doubt if many networks out there use 25 bit netmasks).







                                                share|improve this answer












                                                share|improve this answer



                                                share|improve this answer










                                                answered Aug 11 '09 at 12:26









                                                Maximus MinimusMaximus Minimus

                                                8,82511631




                                                8,82511631



























                                                    draft saved

                                                    draft discarded
















































                                                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Server Fault!


                                                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                                                    But avoid


                                                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                                                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                                                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                                                    draft saved


                                                    draft discarded














                                                    StackExchange.ready(
                                                    function ()
                                                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fserverfault.com%2fquestions%2f52631%2fis-it-better-to-use-the-192-168-x-x-or-10-x-x-x-address-range-for-a-small-busine%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                                                    );

                                                    Post as a guest















                                                    Required, but never shown





















































                                                    Required, but never shown














                                                    Required, but never shown












                                                    Required, but never shown







                                                    Required, but never shown

































                                                    Required, but never shown














                                                    Required, but never shown












                                                    Required, but never shown







                                                    Required, but never shown







                                                    Popular posts from this blog

                                                    Wikipedia:Vital articles Мазмуну Biography - Өмүр баян Philosophy and psychology - Философия жана психология Religion - Дин Social sciences - Коомдук илимдер Language and literature - Тил жана адабият Science - Илим Technology - Технология Arts and recreation - Искусство жана эс алуу History and geography - Тарых жана география Навигация менюсу

                                                    Club Baloncesto Breogán Índice Historia | Pavillón | Nome | O Breogán na cultura popular | Xogadores | Adestradores | Presidentes | Palmarés | Historial | Líderes | Notas | Véxase tamén | Menú de navegacióncbbreogan.galCadroGuía oficial da ACB 2009-10, páxina 201Guía oficial ACB 1992, páxina 183. Editorial DB.É de 6.500 espectadores sentados axeitándose á última normativa"Estudiantes Junior, entre as mellores canteiras"o orixinalHemeroteca El Mundo Deportivo, 16 setembro de 1970, páxina 12Historia do BreogánAlfredo Pérez, o último canoneiroHistoria C.B. BreogánHemeroteca de El Mundo DeportivoJimmy Wright, norteamericano do Breogán deixará Lugo por ameazas de morteResultados de Breogán en 1986-87Resultados de Breogán en 1990-91Ficha de Velimir Perasović en acb.comResultados de Breogán en 1994-95Breogán arrasa al Barça. "El Mundo Deportivo", 27 de setembro de 1999, páxina 58CB Breogán - FC BarcelonaA FEB invita a participar nunha nova Liga EuropeaCharlie Bell na prensa estatalMáximos anotadores 2005Tempada 2005-06 : Tódolos Xogadores da Xornada""Non quero pensar nunha man negra, mais pregúntome que está a pasar""o orixinalRaúl López, orgulloso dos xogadores, presume da boa saúde económica do BreogánJulio González confirma que cesa como presidente del BreogánHomenaxe a Lisardo GómezA tempada do rexurdimento celesteEntrevista a Lisardo GómezEl COB dinamita el Pazo para forzar el quinto (69-73)Cafés Candelas, patrocinador del CB Breogán"Suso Lázare, novo presidente do Breogán"o orixinalCafés Candelas Breogán firma el mayor triunfo de la historiaEl Breogán realizará 17 homenajes por su cincuenta aniversario"O Breogán honra ao seu fundador e primeiro presidente"o orixinalMiguel Giao recibiu a homenaxe do PazoHomenaxe aos primeiros gladiadores celestesO home que nos amosa como ver o Breo co corazónTita Franco será homenaxeada polos #50anosdeBreoJulio Vila recibirá unha homenaxe in memoriam polos #50anosdeBreo"O Breogán homenaxeará aos seus aboados máis veteráns"Pechada ovación a «Capi» Sanmartín e Ricardo «Corazón de González»Homenaxe por décadas de informaciónPaco García volve ao Pazo con motivo do 50 aniversario"Resultados y clasificaciones""O Cafés Candelas Breogán, campión da Copa Princesa""O Cafés Candelas Breogán, equipo ACB"C.B. Breogán"Proxecto social"o orixinal"Centros asociados"o orixinalFicha en imdb.comMario Camus trata la recuperación del amor en 'La vieja música', su última película"Páxina web oficial""Club Baloncesto Breogán""C. B. Breogán S.A.D."eehttp://www.fegaba.com

                                                    What should I write in an apology letter, since I have decided not to join a company after accepting an offer letterShould I keep looking after accepting a job offer?What should I do when I've been verbally told I would get an offer letter, but still haven't gotten one after 4 weeks?Do I accept an offer from a company that I am not likely to join?New job hasn't confirmed starting date and I want to give current employer as much notice as possibleHow should I address my manager in my resignation letter?HR delayed background verification, now jobless as resignedNo email communication after accepting a formal written offer. How should I phrase the call?What should I do if after receiving a verbal offer letter I am informed that my written job offer is put on hold due to some internal issues?Should I inform the current employer that I am about to resign within 1-2 weeks since I have signed the offer letter and waiting for visa?What company will do, if I send their offer letter to another company