🚀 go-pugleaf

At 01:10 PM 7/25/97 -0400, you wrote:

>I was just talking to a Cisco engineer, and he told me never to use the
>first and last subnets of a /24. To be honest, I've _never_ heard anyone say
>this before. Is this an accepted practise? It seems exceptionally wasteful,
>but if there's a good reason, I suppose I'll be renumbering a bunch o' boxes.

Huh?   Define "first and last subnets of a /24".   A /24 subnetted to what
degree?  Into eight /27's, meaning to throw away 60 addresses?

Are you sure he didn't simply mean not to use the broadcast and network
addresses, i.e. the first and last IP's within any network or subnet, no
matter the size?   i.e. in a /24, you cannot use a.b.c.0 or a.b.c.255,
since they represent the network and broadcast addresses, leaving you with
254 usable addresses; in a sample /27, you cannot use a.b.c.31 or a.b.c.64,
as .31 is the network address and .64 is the broadcast address (and .65
would be the NEXT netowrk address of the next /27)....

Your question as asked doesn't really make sense to me....





============================== ISP Mailing List ==============================
Email ``unsubscribe'' to inet-access-request@earth.com to be removed.
Don't post very large messages, post a pointer to an ftp or web site.