From owner-freebsd-doc Fri Dec 20 12:23: 6 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 948DA37B401; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 12:23:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from rwcrmhc51.attbi.com (rwcrmhc51.attbi.com [204.127.198.38]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2197643ED8; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 12:23:05 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from swear@attbi.com) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([12.242.158.67]) by rwcrmhc51.attbi.com (rwcrmhc51) with ESMTP id <20021220202259051006iea8e>; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 20:22:59 +0000 Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.localdomain (8.12.6/8.12.5) with ESMTP id gBKKMbk7001438; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 12:22:42 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from swear@attbi.com) Received: (from jojo@localhost) by localhost.localdomain (8.12.6/8.12.5/Submit) id gBKKMWoL001435; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 12:22:32 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from swear@attbi.com) X-Authentication-Warning: localhost.localdomain: jojo set sender to swear@attbi.com using -f To: Marc Fonvieille Cc: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD Handbook References: <3E01FA5E.87B6FC46@mitre.org> <20021219195435.GA540@nosferatu.blackend.org> <20021219204626.GB7370@submonkey.net> <20021219210115.GC540@nosferatu.blackend.org> From: swear@attbi.com (Gary W. Swearingen) Date: 20 Dec 2002 12:22:32 -0800 In-Reply-To: <20021219210115.GC540@nosferatu.blackend.org> Message-ID: Lines: 34 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.1 (Cuyahoga Valley) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Marc Fonvieille writes: > On Thu, Dec 19, 2002 at 08:46:26PM +0000, Ceri Davies wrote: ... > > It might be a "block of class Cs", but it's definitely not a "class C block". > > Well, for me it's the same meaning, but I will put that on the > "distorsion" coming from the translation between english and my native > tongue. So, I let someone else fixing that part. Your English didn't fail you; people are just making different assumptions about the jargon being used in that part of the Handbook. Some see the word "class" and assume that classic "classful addressing" jargon is being used so that one might expect "Class C block" to be interpreted as meaning "Class C network" which should mean 256 addresses. Others assume that sub-netting is so common that that should be the default jargon wherein networks and blocks can have new sizes and so they need to be specified more explicitly (as it was in the handbook, btw -- but specified bigger than a classic network). In the new jargon, the old jargon can be referred to by prefixing it with "natural" or "classic". The new jargon continues the use of "Class X", but mainly to refer to the value of the upper few bits of the addresses (eg, A=0, B=10, C=110, etc.), and not to network sizes. So "block of class Cs" and "class C block" have the same meaning, except maybe in the jargon of classic classful addressing which some people continue to use in places where it's not clear that the old jargon is being used. And I must admit that "class C block" just might have the peculiar meaning of 256 addresses to many even in these sub-netting days; maybe even enough to fairly call it part of the new jargon; traditions are hard to break and I haven't taken a poll. But for writers the term has become ambiguous and they shouldn't assume that readers still consider it to mean 256 addresses unless a context of stateful addressing has been clearly established. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message