On 2/11/15 5:55 PM, Matt Churchyard wrote:
I appreciate that it might be 'valid' as a binary mask, but I'm struggling to find
any documentation anywhere that actually suggests that it's valid as a network
configuration. The entire modern CIDR notation, and all the routing system &
hardware built around it (that shows networks in CIDR form and will collapse
routes) has no way of dealing with these subnets.
most can deal with it, just not optimally
Are there actually valid use cases for these types of network?
yes.
I've had networks that were the first and last quarter of a /24, and
the middle two quarters were separate nets.
Sure, it made my skin crawl, but I was in a pinch to get more machines
onto that /26.
all four were served by the same router so only one router needed to
know..
I have however at times though we could think about making ifconfig at
give a warning.
(but not an error).
I'm learning towards the opinion that they should be rejected unless the user
specifically overrides it (with something like an ifconfig flag or sysctl).
Although having said that, it's not really doing any damage letting people get
their netmasks wrong. However, as I mentioned in my first email, Windows 8.1
(and I've now tested Server 2012 which is fairly common in enterprise
globally...) will not allow them.
_______________________________________________
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
_______________________________________________
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
