Subnet Fields > 8 bits: SUMMARY

Article View: comp.protocols.tcp-ip

Article #8034

Back to comp.protocols.tcp-ip Previous Next

#8034

From: Richard Huddleston
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1993 02:29

28 lines
1356 bytes

Summary of results/responses from my posting re: what the hell gives
with subnet masks greater than 8 bits ( on a Class A or B net ID ) ?
 
The answer, briefly, is: nothing gives.  Provided there are at least
two bits for the host IDs, you can do anything ya want.  There were
numerous caveats about which particular subnet schemes would be supported
by routing hardware; for example, non-contiguous bitmasks aren't always
supported, and neither are mixed-field-length subnets.
 
Relevant RFCs were
 
 917
 919
 922
 940
 950
 
I'd like to thank everybody who took the time to respond to my posting, and
for the high quality, as well, of the responses.  Low BS to content ratio.
 
 

-- 
Richard Huddleston
University of Maryland at College Park

Personal opinions

Technical Details

Message-ID: <1993Jan29.022949.15531@wam.umd.edu>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!ukma!gatech!purdue!haven.umd.edu!wam.umd.edu!reh

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip,comp.unix.admin
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!ukma!gatech!purdue!haven.umd.edu!wam.umd.edu!reh
From: reh@wam.umd.edu (Richard Huddleston)
Subject: Subnet Fields > 8 bits: SUMMARY
Message-ID: <1993Jan29.022949.15531@wam.umd.edu>
Followup-To: poster
Keywords: IP Subnet Fields, Internet IP Addressing
Sender: usenet@wam.umd.edu (USENET News system)
Nntp-Posting-Host: rac1.wam.umd.edu
Organization: Workstations at Maryland, University of Maryland, College Park
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1993 02:29:49 GMT
Lines: 28