Point to Point interfaces within a private ip address (Overlapping IP address) - Packet Tracer

[netstudent1]

Hello I would like to apologize if this is in the wrong section for these sort of questions

I am currently looking for some help when it comes to IP addressing between router's, in particular, point-to-point interfaces.

I am creating a small private network with two 1941 routers and two 2960 switches. I have chosen to use 192.168.0.0/16 and 10.0.0.0/8 for either network. I have outlined my IP scheme below for each router. I have reserved the first IP address (10.0.0.1/192.168.0.1) in each scheme for the router to switch interface on G0/1 and made it the default route for all end devices in the networks. G0/0 is reserved for connecting routers together.

R1

G0/1 - 192.168.0.1 255.255.0.0

R2

G0/1 - 10.0.0.1 255.0.0.0

When I try and assign an IP address to Interfaces G0/0, which is the connection between routers, an error comes back in packet tracer saying the IP overlaps with int G0/1.

I am just wondering how to overcome this issue, I am quite new to cisco and still learning everything properly so again, I apologize if this is a stupid question but it is something I must have missed on my studies thus far.

Any help would be appreciated

[pwwiddicombe]

On any given interface, you probably don't want to assign a /16 network - remember, that's 64,000 addresses ! 

What's conventional is to break down the /16 network into appropriate sized chunks - and uplinks typically have /30 addresses, unless you have shaping or monitoring devices in the "link space".

Without knowing the physical and logical topology, you might start out

10.0.0.1 /32 as the first "link" subnet

10.0.0.5 /32 as the second link...

10.1.0.1/24 as a server farm

10.0.x.1/24 for wiring closet x, of which you can have over 200; providing you don't need more than 200 addresses out of that closet...

If you have multiple buildings, or larger populations, or IPT, or wireless...  These all have to be designed in.

[netstudent1]

Thank you for your reply. This is what I also thought and it solves the issue I am having.

I was under the assumption you should stick to private addressing space when creating these kinds of networks? Can you have a different subnet for 10.0.0.0 network and it is still private? I thought you had to stick to a /16 subnet for it to remain private

Again sorry if these are stupid question but I am just starting out learning about how the networks function

[pwwiddicombe]

The /8 on 10.0.0.0 is the whole space; but other than in a lab, nobody would (should?) actually use it that way.  A /16 address might be sufficient for internal addresses for a worldwide company, if properly split.  You could have 16 blocks of 4,000 addresses each (representing countries or large offices or whatever); and each block of 4000 then subdivided further for the appropriate local topology.

[netstudent1]

Now that I think about it properly it is all starting to make sense, for some reason i thought a new subnet represented a new network that wasn't private but of course subnetting is used to segment the network. Thanks for your help today, finally understand something i was unsure of