From owner-freebsd-isp Sun Dec 14 14:01:36 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id OAA14644 for isp-outgoing; Sun, 14 Dec 1997 14:01:36 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-isp) Received: from panda.hilink.com.au (panda.hilink.com.au [203.8.15.25]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA14636 for ; Sun, 14 Dec 1997 14:01:31 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from danny@panda.hilink.com.au) Received: (from danny@localhost) by panda.hilink.com.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id JAA16520; Mon, 15 Dec 1997 09:01:12 +1100 (EST) Date: Mon, 15 Dec 1997 09:01:11 +1100 (EST) From: "Daniel O'Callaghan" To: "George M. Ellenburg" cc: isp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Subnetting, Firewalls, Class C's In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19971214144719.009403c0@sundial.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Sun, 14 Dec 1997, George M. Ellenburg wrote: > > Suffering from a cold, and heavy medication, I wish to run the > following by some of you to confirm or deny that this subnetting > example will work; everything tells me yes, but I would appreciate a > second opinion: > > ip ranges netmask > 204.181.150.1 - > 204.181.150.14 255.255.255.240 Yes > 204.181.150.17 - > 204.181.150.30 255.255.255.240 YEs > 204.181.150.33 - > 204.181.150.46 255.255.255.240 Yes > 204.181.150.49 - > 204.181.150.54 255.255.255.248 Yes > 204.181.150.57 - > 204.181.150.254 255.255.255.56 No. If you want a huge subnet, the best you can do is 204.181.150.128:255.255.255.128 which gives you hosts .129-254. Danny