🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <01bccbc1$987592a0$0200a8c0@nadan.nadan.com.au>,
Nathan D <nathand@avon_dot_net_dot_au> wrote:
>I have just acquired another PC which I plan to setup as a server to run as an IP
>Masquerader for my Win95 box.  I currently have the 2 machines talking peer to peer with
>Win95 and am soon to setup the Linux side.
>Most of the howto's refer to addresses 192.168.0.0 - 192.168.255.255.  I then noticed
>that a lot use 192.168.1.x as an example.  Is there any reason to use this instead of
>192.168.0.x as my machines are at the moment (ie 192.168.0.1 & 192.168.0.2)?

Not particularly.  192.168.0.0-192.168.255.255 refers to the range of
256 class C network numbers reserved for private internets.

The network number of 192.168.0.0 is the first in that range and is
perfectly valid although I would guess that the HOWTOs probably use
192.168.1.0 since it may be clearer to newcomers that only the last
octet defines the host.

You do gain a slight[1] advantage by using 192.168.0.0 since
192.168.0.1 may be entered as 192.168.1 .

[1] Wow!  Two whole keystrokes! :-) [2]
[2] Then again you could use the class A address and number your hosts
    10.1 and 10.2 :-) :-)

Regards,
-- 
Brendan O'Dea                                        bod@compusol.com.au
Compusol Pty. Limited                  (NSW, Australia)  +61 2 9809 0133