[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