Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 11 Feb 2015 17:49:35 +0000
From:      Matt Churchyard <matt.churchyard@userve.net>
To:        Warren Block <wblock@wonkity.com>, "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Invalid subnet masks
Message-ID:  <CCB57DE0-24A4-4A06-ADB9-776B2000EE70@userve.net>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.11.1502111033140.4693@wonkity.com>
References:  <7e069c1946454793b1c7e0be988877c4@SERVER.ad.usd-group.com>, <alpine.BSF.2.11.1502111033140.4693@wonkity.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

> On 11 Feb 2015, at 17:38, Warren Block <wblock@wonkity.com> wrote:
>=20
>> On Wed, 11 Feb 2015, Matt Churchyard wrote:
>>=20
>> Just been helping someone on the forums who appears to have configured t=
heir network interface incorrectly. It looks like they've assigned 250.250.=
250.0 as the netmask.
>> I've tried assigning this netmask on a 10.1 machine and ifconfig happily=
 accepts it.
>=20
> As a tangent to that question, ifconfig(8) and the rc.conf settings do ac=
cept CIDR notation, which is both shorter and clearer than a dotted quad IP=
 address and a separate netmask:
>=20
> ifconfig em0 inet 192.168.1.1/24

Yeah I've been using that format in rc.conf for years. Quicker to type and =
looks tidy.=



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CCB57DE0-24A4-4A06-ADB9-776B2000EE70>