Re: Ethernet is not started at boot
On 07.02.18 12:13, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 07, 2018 at 09:58:55PM +1100, Erik Christiansen wrote:
> > Michelle, that netmask is 0b11111111111111111000000100000000 , which is
> > the first I have ever seen with a hole in it.
>
> No, that would be 1111 1111 1111 1111 0111 1111 0000 0000 (some spacing
> added for legibility). But the "hole" thing still is there. I have no idea
> what network equipment will do on that.
Rats, yes, a late-night addition of one when a subtraction was needed.
On 08.02.18 03:33, Richard Hector wrote:
> On 07/02/18 23:58, Erik Christiansen wrote:
> > Not trusting the software to handle an unusual netmask, I might have
> > been tempted to just use a class B netmask, 255.255.0.0 , but then I can
> > be a Feigling in such matters.
>
> Please don't use "class B" to mean /16. Firstly, it's decades out of
> date, and secondly, that range was never in the class B section.
I'm decades out of date too, so it's apt. The intended audience can
probably discern the message that a broader common netmask doesn't weigh
more than a precisely fitted one which might or might not work as
expected. Fastidious fusspotting on minor terminology matters does not
contribute anything to the meat of the matter, no matter how much it
massages the author's ego.
Erik
Reply to: