38 messages in net.nether.puck.cisco-nsp[c-nsp] VLSM
FromSent OnAttachments
ShaunJan 10, 2005 4:53 pm 
Gert DoeringJan 10, 2005 5:26 pm 
Stephen J. WilcoxJan 10, 2005 5:27 pm 
matthew zeierJan 10, 2005 5:46 pm 
ShaunJan 10, 2005 6:19 pm 
Michael SmithJan 10, 2005 6:26 pm 
Stephen J. WilcoxJan 10, 2005 6:28 pm 
lis...@hojmark.orgJan 10, 2005 6:55 pm 
Brant I. StevensJan 10, 2005 11:25 pm 
Gert DoeringJan 11, 2005 2:33 am 
Stephen J. WilcoxJan 11, 2005 6:11 am 
Mark PersikoJan 11, 2005 10:49 am 
Gert DoeringJan 11, 2005 11:22 am 
Hudson Delbert J Contr 61 CS/SCBNJan 11, 2005 12:11 pm 
Brant I. StevensJan 11, 2005 12:45 pm 
Pete TemplinJan 11, 2005 12:52 pm 
Stephen J. WilcoxJan 11, 2005 1:30 pm 
Stephen J. WilcoxJan 11, 2005 1:39 pm 
Pete TemplinJan 11, 2005 2:09 pm 
Gert DoeringJan 11, 2005 2:47 pm 
Gert DoeringJan 11, 2005 2:48 pm 
matthew zeierJan 11, 2005 3:09 pm 
lis...@hojmark.orgJan 11, 2005 5:22 pm 
Anson RinesmithJan 11, 2005 5:47 pm 
Michael LoftisJan 11, 2005 5:57 pm 
Stephen J. WilcoxJan 11, 2005 7:23 pm 
Stephen J. WilcoxJan 11, 2005 7:37 pm 
ShaunJan 11, 2005 8:31 pm 
Jon LewisJan 11, 2005 9:48 pm 
Majid FaridJan 12, 2005 12:24 am 
matthew zeierJan 12, 2005 1:23 am 
Ted MittelstaedtJan 12, 2005 1:41 am 
Ted MittelstaedtJan 12, 2005 1:44 am 
Ted MittelstaedtJan 12, 2005 1:51 am 
lis...@hojmark.orgJan 12, 2005 1:18 pm 
lis...@hojmark.orgJan 12, 2005 1:30 pm 
ShaunJan 13, 2005 4:05 am 
Ted MittelstaedtJan 14, 2005 12:29 am 
Actions with this message:
Paste this link in email or IM:
Paste this link in email or IM:
Atom feed for this thread
Paste this URL into your reader:
Subject:[c-nsp] VLSMActions...
From:Brant I. Stevens (bra@branto.com)
Date:Jan 11, 2005 12:45:37 pm
List:net.nether.puck.cisco-nsp

Though technically being allocated an address block of 200.100.0.0/16 provides you the same number of addresses, as say being allocated 4.100.0.0/16, or 150.100.0.0/16; this is true (256^2) . But in the old classful sense, they are NOT the same. Especially if you are unfortunate enough to still have to deal with RIPv1, or you are performing auto-summary.

Class B Space falls in the range between 128.0.0.0 and 191.255.255.255. If it falls out if that range, then it is not a "Class B", though it may be an allocation of /16.

It does still matter, if even only in very specific cases. That's the point I was trying to make.

On 01/11/2005 12:11 PM, "Hudson Delbert J Contr 61 CS/SCBN" <Delb@LOSANGELES.AF.MIL> wrote:

i know that the education of network guyz is outdated but some of the thingz being stated hear are knee jerk bandwagon jump-on..

since when is a /16 size chunk of addresses not a class 'b' space.

i think what manner in which the size of a space is called as long as one understands what it speak of. much ado about nothing methinks.

-----Original Message----- From: cisc@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisc@puck.nether.net]On Behalf Of lis@hojmark.org Sent: Monday, January 10, 2005 3:59 PM To: 'matthew zeier'; 'Gert Doering'; 'Shaun' Cc: cisc@puck.nether.net Subject: RE: [c-nsp] VLSM

However, I can't get people (sales) to stop calling it "class c".

Even worse is when they (and some 'techs') call everything /24 a "class C" and a every /16 a "class B", even when it's 10.10.10/24 and 10.10/16, for example.

Yuck.

-A

_______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list cisc@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/

_______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list cisc@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/