Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 7 May 1997 09:56:03 -0700 (MST)
From:      Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
To:        bazilio@economic.acnit.ac.ru (Vasily V. Grechishnikov)
Cc:        terry@lambert.org, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Broken NetWare 3.12 TCP/IP support ?
Message-ID:  <199705071656.JAA21310@phaeton.artisoft.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.91.970507140939.1262A-100000@economic.acnit.ac.ru> from "Vasily V. Grechishnikov" at May 7, 97 02:17:20 pm

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> 	The both netware interfaces .19 and .50 has identical netmasks:
> 		255.255.255.248 .

This netmask will not work with the old NLM's.  You should download
the new NLM's (which I've just been made aware of (Thanks!) to let
you use the netmasks you want.

> > You don't give the 'names' of your wires, other than the top
> > level one (named 193.233.113.0/255.255.255.0), so this is mostly
> > speculation from my own experience using NetWare boxes as IP
> > routers at Novell, Sandy.
> 	LAN0 - 193.233.113.0/28
> 	LAN1 - 193.233.113.16/29
> 	LAN2 - 193.233.113.48/29
> 	LAN3 - 193.233.113.32/28
> 	LAN4 - 193.233.113.64/28 - cable is now disconnected because is broken.

Splitting both 28 and 29 off the same wire is ...scary.  Generally,
you want subnetting to be uniform across any class C.  Also,
non-power-of-2 masking may be a problem for you in any case, even
with the new NLM's.


					Regards,
					Terry Lambert
					terry@lambert.org
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199705071656.JAA21310>