So for me *.255 are usable exept 3.255, correct?
Stefan
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 11:00 PM, Ben Scott mailvor...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 7:32 PM, Heaton, Joseph@DFG jhea...@dfg.ca.gov
wrote:
.255 is broadcast
Not always.
Very true, if we go and break up a class C,
Are you guessing, or did you try writing it out as explained to you?
--
Espi
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 7:37 AM, Stefan Jafs stefan.j...@gmail.com wrote:
So for me *.255 are usable exept 3.255, correct?
Stefan
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 11:00 PM, Ben Scott mailvor...@gmail.com wrote:
On
No I did not but i got the idea, i used the Advanced Subnet Calculator
that shows me all my IP's.
No I'm fighting with my switches to change to /22, looks like my Dell
switches I have to connect the cable and do it from the CLI command line,
can't edit the IP in the GUI!
Stefan
On Tue, Jan 10,
No I'm fighting with my switches to change to /22, looks like my Dell
switches I have to connect the cable and do it from the CLI command line,
can't edit the IP in the GUI!
That's for a very good reason that most networking experts would understand
without even attempting...
On Tue, Jan 10,
Typically, there are easy ways and hard ways to go about things, and the
latter outnumber the former for the most part.
Once you've asked for guidance and received it, it pays to take that road,
so as to minimize your time on the latter road.
Just saying.
* *
*ASB*
Without a proper understanding of the fundamentals, you could very easily
make part of, if not all of your network unusable. A subnet calculator is
a handy little tool, but you really should have a good grasp of the
underlying concepts before taking on a challenge of [re]subnetting your
network.
: Expaning Subnet again
Without a proper understanding of the fundamentals, you could very easily
make part of, if not all of your network unusable. A subnet calculator is a
handy little tool, but you really should have a good grasp of the underlying
concepts before taking on a challenge of [re
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 12:40, Micheal Espinola Jr
michealespin...@gmail.com wrote:
Without a proper understanding of the fundamentals, you could very easily
make part of, if not all of your network unusable. A subnet calculator is a
handy little tool, but you really should have a good grasp
Yes, but just to be clear you would have one subnet, one usable range.
192.168.0.1 - 198.2.168.3.255
Download SolarWinds free Subnet Calculator. You have to provide an email
address but I do not recall ever getting spammed by them.
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 09:07, Stefan Jafs stefan.j...@gmail.com wrote:
I know we already talked about extending IP’s last week, however, I’m trying
to figure out how to add additional ranges and can’t seem to figure it out.
I currently have 192.168.0.0 – 192.168.0.256 and 192.168.1.1 –
Simple answer yes.
Your network ip will remain the same 192.168.0.0/22 .
The broadcast ip will change to 192.168.3.255/22 giving you 192.168.0.1
thru 192.168.3.254/22 as your new network.
Of course your default gateway can remain the same or you can change it
on your routers/layer3 and clients.
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Kennedy, Jim
kennedy...@elyriaschools.orgwrote:
** **
Download SolarWinds free Subnet Calculator. You have to provide an email
address but I do not recall ever getting spammed by them.
** **
If you have a subnet mask of 255.255.254.0, then you have one range of
192.168.0.0 - 192.268.1.255 (aka 192.168.0.0 /23) with a network address of
192.168.0.0 and a broadcast address of 192.168.1.255. If you change the subnet
mask to 255.255.252.0, then you'll have a range of 192.168.0.0 -
Yes I have x.0 and x.256 excluded anyhow, and assume the brodcast is
192.168.3.256 not 254, right.
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 12:47 PM, Kurt Buff kurt.b...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 09:07, Stefan Jafs stefan.j...@gmail.com wrote:
I know we already talked about extending IP’s last
Yes, that's my understanding, simply manually change the subnet mask in all
static devices and DHCP and then add the additional ranges to DHCP.
Correct?
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 12:49 PM, Eldridge, D K, d...@parkviewmc.com wrote:
Simple answer yes.
Your “network” ip will remain the same
Should be for this size network.
From: Stefan Jafs [mailto:stefan.j...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, January 09, 2012 11:34 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Expaning Subnet again
Yes, that's my understanding, simply manually change the subnet mask in
all static devices and DHCP
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Stefan Jafs stefan.j...@gmail.com wrote:
I know we already talked about extending IP’s last week, however, I’m trying
to figure out how to add additional ranges and can’t seem to figure it out.
Did you write it out in binary like I did?
I currently have
Do you mean .255? There is no .256. Each octet goes from 0 to 255 for a total
of 256 values.
From: Stefan Jafs [mailto:stefan.j...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, January 09, 2012 12:31 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Expaning Subnet again
Yes I have x.0 and x.256 excluded anyhow
.255 is broadcast
Joe Heaton
ITB - Windows Server Support
From: Stefan Jafs [mailto:stefan.j...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, January 09, 2012 10:31 AM
To: Heaton, Joseph@DFG; NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Expaning Subnet again
Yes I have x.0 and x.256 excluded anyhow, and assume the brodcast
: Expaning Subnet again
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Stefan Jafs stefan.j...@gmail.com wrote:
I know we already talked about extending IP's last week, however, I'm
trying to figure out how to add additional ranges and can't seem to figure it
out.
Did you write it out in binary like I did?
I
Yes I see my error, 0 - 255 not 1 - 256.
Stefan
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 3:10 PM, Ben Scott mailvor...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Stefan Jafs stefan.j...@gmail.com
wrote:
I know we already talked about extending IP’s last week, however, I’m
trying
to figure out how
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 3:35 PM, Heaton, Joseph@DFG jhea...@dfg.ca.gov wrote:
.255 is broadcast
Not always.
-- Ben
~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/ ~
---
To manage subscriptions click here:
...@gmail.com]
*Sent:* Monday, January 09, 2012 10:31 AM
*To:* Heaton, Joseph@DFG; NT System Admin Issues
*Subject:* Re: Expaning Subnet again
** **
Yes I have x.0 and x.256 excluded anyhow, and assume the brodcast is
192.168.3.256 not 254, right.
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 12:47 PM, Kurt Buff
Yup, and yes, you should be very familiar with binary. It's what everything is
based on, afterall. :)
From: Stefan Jafs [mailto:stefan.j...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, January 09, 2012 3:33 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Expaning Subnet again
Just to get things right:
if i go
: Stefan Jafs [mailto:stefan.j...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, January 09, 2012 3:33 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Expaning Subnet again
Just to get things right:
if i go with Subnet: 255.255.252.0 I can then have my range from:
192.168.0.0 - 192.168.3.255 with
192.168.0.0 = Subnet Address
...@gmail.com]
*Sent:* Monday, January 09, 2012 3:33 PM
*To:* NT System Admin Issues
*Subject:* Re: Expaning Subnet again
** **
Just to get things right:
if i go with Subnet: 255.255.252.0 I can then have my range from:
192.168.0.0 - 192.168.3.255 with
192.168.0.0 = Subnet
There are 10 types of people, after all.
Joe Heaton
ITB - Windows Server Support
From: Scott Crawford [mailto:crawfo...@evangel.edu]
Sent: Monday, January 09, 2012 2:21 PM
To: Heaton, Joseph@DFG; NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Expaning Subnet again
Yup, and yes, you should be very familiar
@lyris.sunbelt-software.com
Subject: RE: Expaning Subnet again
Yup, and yes, you should be very familiar with binary. It’s what everything is
based on, afterall. ☺
From: Stefan Jafs [mailto:stefan.j...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, January 09, 2012 3:33 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re
I was waiting to see if someone would say that :-)
*whew*
--
Espi
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 1:25 PM, Ben Scott mailvor...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 3:35 PM, Heaton, Joseph@DFG jhea...@dfg.ca.gov
wrote:
.255 is broadcast
Not always.
-- Ben
~ Finally, powerful endpoint
I've heard that joke 10 times today.
From: Heaton, Joseph@DFG [mailto:jhea...@dfg.ca.gov]
Sent: Monday, January 09, 2012 4:58 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Expaning Subnet again
There are 10 types of people, after all.
Joe Heaton
ITB - Windows Server Support
From: Scott Crawford
Now I’ve heard it 11 times ☺
From: John Cook [mailto:john.c...@pfsf.org]
Sent: Monday, January 09, 2012 4:59 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Expaning Subnet again
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those that understand binary
and those that don't!
John W. Cook
Systems
, 2012 1:25 PM
To: Heaton, Joseph@DFG; NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Expaning Subnet again
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 3:35 PM, Heaton, Joseph@DFG jhea...@dfg.ca.gov wrote:
.255 is broadcast
Not always.
-- Ben
~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~
http
Admin Issues ntsysadmin@lyris.sunbelt-software.com
Subject: RE: Expaning Subnet again
Yup, and yes, you should be very familiar with binary. It’s what everything
is based on, afterall. J
From: Stefan Jafs [mailto:stefan.j...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, January 09, 2012 3:33 PM
To: NT System
I’ve heard this 100 times.
From: Crawford, Scott [mailto:crawfo...@evangel.edu]
Sent: Monday, January 09, 2012 3:53 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Expaning Subnet again
Now I’ve heard it 11 times ☺
From: John Cook [mailto:john.c...@pfsf.org]
Sent: Monday, January 09, 2012 4:59 PM
Admin Issues
*Subject:* RE: Expaning Subnet again
** **
Now I’ve heard it 11 times J
** **
*From:* John Cook [mailto:john.c...@pfsf.org]
*Sent:* Monday, January 09, 2012 4:59 PM
*To:* NT System Admin Issues
*Subject:* Re: Expaning Subnet again
** **
There are only 10 types
...@evangel.edu wrote:
Now I’ve heard it 11 times J
From: John Cook [mailto:john.c...@pfsf.org]
Sent: Monday, January 09, 2012 4:59 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Expaning Subnet again
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those that understand binary
and those that don't
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 7:32 PM, Heaton, Joseph@DFG jhea...@dfg.ca.gov wrote:
.255 is broadcast
Not always.
Very true, if we go and break up a class C, that is absolutely true. But,
seeing as he's going the other way, and making the subnet bigger, not
smaller...
.255 is still not
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 4:32 PM, Stefan Jafs stefan.j...@gmail.com wrote:
do I really need to
count 0 and 1, it was like 40 year ago I took Binary in school.
The computer counts in binary. Whether you want to or not is
irrelevant; that's how it works. If you refuse to learn how it
works...
P.S.:
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 11:09 PM, Ben Scott mailvor...@gmail.com wrote:
Keep in mind that writing it out in binary doesn't mean you have to
manually convert bases.
Or, indeed, that you have to write it. I mostly use copy-and-paste. :-)
-- Ben
~ Finally, powerful endpoint security
39 matches
Mail list logo
