Article View: fa.tcp-ip
Article #355subnet addresses
From: tcp-ip
Date: Sat, 27 Jul 1985 22:51
Date: Sat, 27 Jul 1985 22:51
15 lines
1278 bytes
1278 bytes
From: Charles Hedrick <HEDRICK@RUTGERS.ARPA> We have heard a rumor that some people consider subnet zero to be illegal. Since our current hosts are 128.6.0.x, and we are about to need to move to subnetting, this is an obvious concern to us. We haven't seen this in the proposed subnet RFC, but it has shown up in one piece of code that claimed to implement subnetting. As I read it, there is special meaning attached to 0.0.0.0 - I don't know who I am 0.0.0.x - i.e. all bits under the subnet mask (network number plus subnet number) are zero - I don't know what net I am on x.y.z.0 - I know what net I'm on, but not who I am But I do not see any constraints on the subnet number itself. Am I missing something? -------
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<9394@ucbvax.ARPA>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ulysses!ucbvax!tcp-ipShow Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.ARPA Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ulysses!ucbvax!tcp-ip From: tcp-ip@ucbvax.ARPA Newsgroups: fa.tcp-ip Subject: subnet addresses Message-ID: <9394@ucbvax.ARPA> Date: Sat, 27-Jul-85 18:51:45 EDT Article-I.D.: ucbvax.9394 Posted: Sat Jul 27 18:51:45 1985 Date-Received: Mon, 29-Jul-85 07:05:48 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA Organization: University of California at Berkeley Lines: 15