[NTLUG:Discuss] (no subject)

Kenneth Loafman kenneth at loafman.com
Wed Sep 20 20:15:52 CDT 2006



Graham Wilson wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2006 at 10:42:41PM +0000, dearroz at comcast.net wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 19, 2006 at 02:24:44PM -0500, Wayne Walker wrote:
>>> In theory, you could use 255.255.255.200 and 192.168.1.64.
>>  :( on BSD, but not on linux.  linux's ifconfig command considers the
>> netmask 255.255.255.200 as invalid.
> 
> Isn't that because that *is* an invalid netmask? In binary:
> 
>  255.255.255.200 == 11111111 11111111 11111111 00100000
> 
> AIUI netmasks have to be a list of ones followed by a list of zeros, but
> I could be wrong.

Most of the stacks do not allow non-contiguous net masks anymore.
However, they are allowed in the RFC's and that's all that I was arguing
(plus pointing out that I have seen them used & tested).  We have beaten
this dead horse to a pulp and need to move on.

...Ken



More information about the Discuss mailing list