From owner-freebsd-isp Fri Sep 25 11:17:00 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA13957 for freebsd-isp-outgoing; Fri, 25 Sep 1998 11:17:00 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from Gatekeeper.Alameda.net (gatekeeper.Alameda.net [207.90.181.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id LAA13944 for ; Fri, 25 Sep 1998 11:16:55 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ulf@Gatekeeper.Alameda.net) Received: by Gatekeeper.Alameda.net (8.8.8/8.8.6) id LAA18066; Fri, 25 Sep 1998 11:16:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <19980925111651.D22112@Alameda.net> Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 11:16:51 -0700 From: Ulf Zimmermann To: "Jeffrey J. Mountin" , Bill Vermillion , freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Routing problem Reply-To: ulf@Alameda.net 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> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.91.1i 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 Organization: Alameda Networks, Inc. X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 2.2.6-STABLE Sender: owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org 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