From owner-freebsd-bugs  Sun Mar  2 11:40:04 1997
Return-Path: <owner-bugs>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id LAA27308
          for bugs-outgoing; Sun, 2 Mar 1997 11:40:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from gnats@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id LAA27299;
          Sun, 2 Mar 1997 11:40:02 -0800 (PST)
Date: Sun, 2 Mar 1997 11:40:02 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199703021940.LAA27299@freefall.freebsd.org>
To: freebsd-bugs
Cc: 
From: Bill Fenner <fenner@parc.xerox.com>
Subject: Re: conf/2838: Installation chooses incorrect default netmask 
Reply-To: Bill Fenner <fenner@parc.xerox.com>
Sender: owner-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

The following reply was made to PR conf/2838; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Bill Fenner <fenner@parc.xerox.com>
To: pgiffuni@fps.biblos.unal.edu.co
Cc: freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: conf/2838: Installation chooses incorrect default netmask 
Date: Sun, 2 Mar 1997 11:29:14 PST

 pgiffuni@fps.biblos.unal.edu.co wrote:
 >IMO the netmask selection should be intelligent enough to set 255.255.0.0
 >when it is in a class B network, and 255.0.0.0 on a class A network.
 
 IMO, it's rare to find any network anywhere that doesn't use
 subnetting.  Many subnets are 24 bits (aka 255.255.255.0), and
 almost all are close (e.g. Xerox uses 22 bits, 255.255.252.0,
 so having the default 255.255.255.0 means less editing than
 255.0.0.0 would).
 
 If you really don't use subnetting, you are in the minority and
 unfortunately have to do a little extra work.
 
   Bill