Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 25 Sep 1998 11:16:51 -0700
From:      Ulf Zimmermann <ulf@Alameda.net>
To:        "Jeffrey J. Mountin" <jeff-ml@mountin.net>, Bill Vermillion <bill@bilver.magicnet.net>, freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Routing problem
Message-ID:  <19980925111651.D22112@Alameda.net>
In-Reply-To: <3.0.3.32.19980925121618.00714074@207.227.119.2>; from Jeffrey J. Mountin on Fri, Sep 25, 1998 at 12:16:18PM -0500
References:  <199809240148.VAA29188@bilver.magicnet.net> <360938BE.3569E424@eaznet.com> <199809240148.VAA29188@bilver.magicnet.net> <19980924150846.C24890@Alameda.net> <3.0.3.32.19980925121618.00714074@207.227.119.2>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Sep 25, 1998 at 12:16:18PM -0500, Jeffrey J. Mountin wrote:
> At 03:08 PM 9/24/98 -0700, Ulf Zimmermann wrote:
> >On Wed, Sep 23, 1998 at 09:48:10PM -0400, Bill Vermillion wrote:
> >> Eddie Fry recently said:
> >> > Randal,
> >> > 
> >> > Ronald says he has 2 class C's so his mask should be 255.255.255.0.
> >> 
> >> He says he has two class C's but he's using class A addressing.
> >> 
> >> Shouldn't the netmask really be 254.0.0.0  ?  That way it will
> >> supernet the 10.1 and the 10.2  into two parallel blocks out of 
> >> address.. 10.1 thru 10.2.   
> >
> >254 would give you a supernet which includes 10.0.0.0/8 and 11.0.0.0/8.
> >
> >> 
> >> I know you can't use the 1 bit mask in the subnetting a c because
> >> it will give a network address and a mask with nothing in between.
> >> 
> >> Will a 254.0.0.0 set it up so that 10.1.0.0 is the base and 
> >> 10.2.255.255 is the broadcast.
> >
> >To do that, the netmask would be 255.252.0.0, but that would include
> >10.0.0.0/16, 10.1.0.0/16, 10.2.0.0/16 and 10.3.0.0/16, so the broadcast
> >would be 10.3.255.255
> 
> But isn't 10.0.0.0/255.254.0.0 a valid netmask?  It would give 10.0.0.0/16 and 10.1.0.0/16, which wouldn't work for the posted is doing ie routing between the 2 networks.
> 
> It certainly isn't a CIDR mask, but should be valid for supernets.

It is a valid netmask, but it wouldn't include 10.1.0.0/16 and 10.2.0.0/16 as
he wrote. 

> 
> 
> Jeff Mountin - Unix Systems TCP/IP networking
> jeff@mountin.net

-- 
Regards, Ulf.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Ulf Zimmermann, 1525 Pacific Ave., Alameda, CA-94501, #: 510-769-2936
Alameda Networks, Inc. | http://www.Alameda.net  | Fax#: 510-521-5073

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19980925111651.D22112>