Re: [CentOS] Re: DHCP static hosts and subnet configuration
John wrote: > Correct there. Classless Inter Domain Routing, never really got into doing > that. Do tell. > Largest I have dealt with was 1500 nodes and cidr is not needed there. Ermm. Classful routing is *dead*, CIDR is needed *everywhere*. > My main thing has always been getting a network provider to also provide > failover redudance. Had one dealing with lighting fiber and that was a > nightmare. Maybe I can get a few CIDR pointers from you. :-) http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1519.html - subnetting and such ... Ralph pgp2WzwasxQFi.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
RE: [CentOS] Re: DHCP static hosts and subnet configuration
Scott Silva (Mail Scanner) Wrote: >TCP/IP works the same way no matter what country you are from. The terms are >the same, and if someone uses the wrong term, it is not the language >difference, that person just learned the wrong term. Yes, works the same in all Countries. Layers 1,2,3 of the OSI Stack. I guess what I should have said was Subnet. >A subnet is what you get when you finish subnetting. One is a noun, one is a >verb. It can only be done the way it was designed to be done. You can do some >very creative things with CIDR now, but that was created more as a way to make >smaller routing tables than any other reason. Correct there. Classless Inter Domain Routing, never really got into doing that. Largest I have dealt with was 1500 nodes and cidr is not needed there. My main thing has always been getting a network provider to also provide failover redudance. Had one dealing with lighting fiber and that was a nightmare. Maybe I can get a few CIDR pointers from you. :-) JohnStanley ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] Re: DHCP static hosts and subnet configuration
on 10-17-2008 3:25 PM John spake the following: >> I wonder why I cant do that, seeing as have been doing it over 10 years. > One >> often misguided approach to setting them up is, facing it directly into > the >> open internet. Your as good as gone when someone hits up the ftp port on >> that shiny new PIX and tunnels right in. > > I never heard anyone calling that "subnetting", as a subnet is a differently > defined term. > - > JohnStanley Writes > > I agree Subnetting and Subnet are 2 different things in whole. Subnetting is > taking an IP and borrowing bits from the ip and making additional net blocks > perferably in dotted decimal form is the easiest way. > I guess seeing as you (DE Land) and I(US) both are of different > nationalities bring up the information devide between us. For the most part > we are referring to the same thing but are calling it a diferent name. I do > often however have a laugh at times about things on this list from people in > Europe. I read posts sometime that mean something totaly different here but > then some will answer it where the poster is from and then it kinda begins > to make sense. TCP/IP works the same way no matter what country you are from. The terms are the same, and if someone uses the wrong term, it is not the language difference, that person just learned the wrong term. A subnet is what you get when you finish subnetting. One is a noun, one is a verb. It can only be done the way it was designed to be done. You can do some very creative things with CIDR now, but that was created more as a way to make smaller routing tables than any other reason. -- MailScanner is like deodorant... You hope everybody uses it, and you notice quickly if they don't signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
