Using the same private address range for lan and wan interface.

[jomo frank]

Hello Experts,

I have a network (hub connected to 9 branch office).

We are considering changing out lan side of the network from 172.31.xx.xx to 10.190.xx.xx to accommodate a business merger. The issue is our wan side ip address is 10.30.xx.xx.

Changes for the lan side is quite simple but if the wan side is to change will required a lot of work on the router.

Is there any danger in doing this using 10.190.xx.xx network  as lan and 10.30.xx.xx as the wan?

Regards

[Meheretab Mengistu · Accepted solution]

Hi,
No, there is no danger in using 10.190.x.x/16 on WAN side and 10.30.x.x/16 on the LAN side.

HTH,
Meheretab

[luis_cordova]

Hi @jomo frank ,

I think that as long as you are careful when planning the networks and indicate well the masks or wildcards when configuring, you should not have problems.

Regards

[paul driver]

Hello

---

@jomo frank wrote:

Hello Experts,

I have a network (hub connected to 9 branch office).

We are considering changing out lan side of the network from 172.31.xx.xx to 10.190.xx.xx to accommodate a business merger.

So the lan becomes 10.190.x.x. correct?

---

@jomo frank wrote:
is there any danger in doing this using 10.190.xx.xx network as wan

So given the first statement this second statement doesn't make sense?

[Richard Burts]

We are given only some very general information about the situation (very high level with no specifics) and asked what appears to be a simple question, which appears to be whether there are issues in the configuration if the outside WAN subnet and the inside LAN subnet are both in the same major network.

From a very high level perspective we can say that there are no issues if both LAN and WAN subnets are both in the same major network. When you get into details there is always some possibility that something we do not know about might cause problems. But based on the information provided there should be no issues with both LAN and WAN subnets in the same major network.

HTH

Rick

[jomo frank]

Hello Paul,

Thanks for pointing out the error
>> is there any danger in doing this using 10.190.xx.xx network as wan
>> So given the first statement this second statement doesn't make sense?
I modify the first post.
The new statement should read --- Is there any danger in doing this using 10.190.xx.xx network as lan and 10.30.xx.xx as the wan?

Regards


Regards