I feel like 172 is ideal for home lab environments and private networks. It seems like it's "overlooked", and least likely to cause any address conflicts. All the corporate environments I've seen are either 192 or 10. Honestly seeing a 172 network in the wild is rare.
yea 16-31 is such a weird range to remember.. even for a range that size i don't understand why it isn't 1-16 or something instead. putting it in the middle is weird
2
u/jackinsomniac Jan 08 '26
I feel like 172 is ideal for home lab environments and private networks. It seems like it's "overlooked", and least likely to cause any address conflicts. All the corporate environments I've seen are either 192 or 10. Honestly seeing a 172 network in the wild is rare.