Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2006 10:15:13 +0100 From: "Niclas Zeising" <niclas.zeising@gmail.com> Cc: Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org>, cvs-doc@freebsd.org, Dmitry Morozovsky <marck@rinet.ru>, cvs-all@freebsd.org, Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@freebsd.org>, doc-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/install chapter.sgml Message-ID: <bc292860612060115s7d1b9d21xab478d4c3fc49a8b@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20061205203738.251FD45042@ptavv.es.net> References: <20061205161214.GB3357@kobe.laptop> <20061205203738.251FD45042@ptavv.es.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[Send to list as well] On 12/5/06, Kevin Oberman <oberman@es.net> wrote: > > Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2006 18:12:14 +0200 > > From: Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@freebsd.org> > > Sender: owner-cvs-all@freebsd.org > > > > > > > > On 2006-12-05 13:53, Dmitry Morozovsky <marck@rinet.ru> wrote: > > > On Mon, 4 Dec 2006, Doug Barton wrote: > > > DB> > Log: > > > DB> > A class C network for 192.168.0.0/24 includes the address > > > DB> > range 192.168.0.0-192.168.0.255, not 192.168.0.0-192.168.255.255 > > > DB> > > > > DB> > Submitted by: Tom Van Looy <tom@ctors.net> > > > DB> > > > DB> In an ideal world, all references to Class [ABC] networks would > > > DB> disappear from our docs, and be replaced by their CIDR equivalents. > > > > > > There are suprisingly small number of such places. What do you think about the > > > patch attached? > > > > I'm not sure I like the appearance of "/24" in flowing text, but the > > patch builds fine. > > [snip patch] > > > > Is there any way we can rephrase this to avoid having to use /24 in the > > middle of a sentence. How do the documentation texts of Cisco and other > > networking-related companies, which have a lot of texts about CIDR > > address ranges, deal with this? > > CIDR format is specified as address/length, so 128.0.0.0/18 is the only > sanctioned way to specify this per RFCs. The fact that Cisco routers > still require the crufty masks and wildcard bits not withstanding. > > Juniper routers use only proper CIDR syntax. > > FreeBSD will accept either for IPv4 (ifconfig(8)). > > In the world of IPv6, only CIDR notation is used, even by Cisco. > > We really should only be used CIDR notation unless we are explaining the > legacy use of masks. Class A/B/C has been obsolete for almost a decade > and really, really should go away. > Maybe we should mention somewhere that the old class A/B/C networks have been obsoleted by CDIR and not simply remove all references to it. I also think we should explain a bit about how CDIR works, as someone suggested. You can also point people to http://www.3com.com/other/pdfs/infra/corpinfo/en_US/501302.pdf which explains a lot about CDIR, subnetting and whatnot. Just some thoughts. //Niclas --
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bc292860612060115s7d1b9d21xab478d4c3fc49a8b>