In the life of a system administrator, always will come a moment when an IP subnet needs to be defined. Be it your small home LAN or the endless company WAN where madness lurks in the depths of unknown routes, IP addresses will always need to be choosen, divided and assigned to some device, deserving it or not. And, while in the "real world" of the public Internet you'll have to just obey your ISP's orders, you're free to choose your path and your ultimate destiny when it comes to your own private network.
As everyone knows (or should know), the mighty RFC 1918 states that private network IP addresses can only fall in three great blocks:
192.168.0.0/16 172.16.0.0/12 10.0.0.0/8
Which is your favorite one?
How big do you usually choose to make a subnet, regardless of course of how many devices you really need to connect to it?
Do you think it should be kept to a minimum, or should it be as great and glorious as possible?
Do you believe in the law and order of "round" subnets (/8,/16,/24), or do you prefer the anarchy and crawling chaos of "unround" ones?
Do you follow the Sacred School of Our Gateway Should Be .1, the Unholy Temple of No It Should Be .254, or the blasphemous teachings of the Order Of It Shall End With Whatever We Want It To End With?
Do you feel in your heart that Servers should have "low" addresses and Clients should use "high" ones? Or will only Fate define how the Server and the Client are to be called?
Do you always use (or try to use) the same ending numbers in all the subnets you manage, so that you may find your gateway and your DNS in the hour of your great need?
Do you believe in DHCP or in Static Addressing? And do you have faith in their hybrid child, DHCP With Reservations, even for not-client machines like network printers or, may all the Gods forgive you, Servers?
"Take this and divide it; this is my 2^32 address space, which shall be endlessly fragmented for all your addressing needs, until IPv6 may finally come."