On Sun, 23 Mar 2003, David A. Bandel wrote: > With non-VLSM CIDR, we can't use /#. We will also get very large > headaches trying to calculate which IPs are found on a network with > absurd netmasks like 255.255.255.123. If you don't think this is valid, > you can try it on your network and see that it works just fine with the > following values: > network: 192.168.0.1 > netmask: 255.255.255.123 > broadcast: 192.168.0.133 > hosts: 192.168.0.5, 192.168.0.129 > yes, for this particular netmask, there are only 2 hosts, other non-VLSM > netmasks give varying numbers of hosts in different patterns scattered > about between the network and broadcast numbers.
Wild, I've never seen non-contigous netmasks before. Is this legal per the ip specifiation, or just the result of the xor/nor (sorry don't remember the boolean operation involved between ip and netmask) operation? > Note: since I'm not a masochist and don't like headaches (or anding > binary netmasks w/ addresses), I use a program to calculate the above > just as the kernel does. > > Ciao, > > David A. Bandel > _______________________________________________ Linux-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe/Suspend/Etc -> http://www.linux-sxs.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-users
