On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 14:59:53 +0100 Joe <j...@jretrading.com> wrote: > On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 08:15:09 -0400 > Celejar <cele...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Currently, my LAN is 192.168.0.0/24, which is also the addressing > > scheme of some of the networks out of my control that I'm setting up a > > VPN link from. I deliberately used 10.0.0.0/24 for the VPN to avoid > > address collisions with these other networks. It did occur to me to > > consider using a different address space, for the VPN or perhaps for > > the whole home LAN, but I'd rather not take that step just to solve > > what seems a relatively simple problem unless absolutely necessary > > > > If you do get pushed to doing that, there are a few commonly used > networks that you should avoid. 10. is often used with a netmask of > /24 or /8, and the latter precludes all 10. variants. Of the 192.168. > groups, 0, 1, 8, 16 and 254 are often used, best use something quite > random like 192.168.137.0/24. > > Probably better still is one of the 172.16-172.31 groups, which don't > seem to be used as defaults very often.
Thanks. When I first set up the VPN, I did some reading about this, and I was rather shocked to see that there was no definitive solution to avoid address collisions, just recommendations like yours to try to make a good guess about it ... Celejar
