The date is Sept 12 , 2001 , the first few lines of the page :) > if the Bates Report is any indication, the trend is actually towards more > fragmentation of the former class A space. ARIN has been allocating out of > 64, 65, 66, blocks, for example. Those in turn have been doled out to > various ISP's and other organizations as something longer than /8 - usually > /16 or even longer, from what I can tell on quick notice. I believe RIPE > recently opened up the 80 block. I seem to recall APNIC recently announcing > opening of the 210/8 or 218/8 block. Saw it on NANOG a few weeks back, I > think. > > In other words, for public IP space, I don't think anyone other than the > registries themselves have title to more than one /8 address block. Which > would therefore render the argument of supernetting /8's as moot. > > I suppose someone could do something like that in the 10 space, but one has > to wonder why? > > BTW, looking over the allocation table at: > http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space > > interesting. anyone know how up to date this is? > > Chuck > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > Paul Werner > Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2001 5:31 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Re: Subject: Re: quick response (help) please [7:24238] > > > Agreed. While it is possible to supernet class A > addresses, it is generally impractical for the > most part, unless the ISP/AS that is summarizing > two Class A addresses owns both address spaces > (and they are contiguous). I might suspect that > somebody such as UUNet or AOL or Sprint might do > it, but checking the ARIN registry and IANA, I > cannot readily find any of them with contiguous > netblocks in the Class A address space for ISP > use. There are a few, but I would expect those > that exist to get returned back to IANA for > reassignment (watch wrap): > > http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space > > Class B and Class C address space is an entirely > different matter w.r.t supernetting. You will > note that just about all of the Class C address > space is set up and optimized for supernetting > based upon registry (read geographic) > allocation. That makes sense. > > HTH, > > Paul Werner > > > ---- On Sat, 27 Oct 2001, Thomas Larus > ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > > Great point. It's not a supernet of anything. > Not with the first octet > > being 24. > > > > Thomas Larus > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Paul Werner" > > To: ; "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > > > Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2001 4:02 PM > > Subject: Re: Subject: Re: quick response (help) > please [7:24238] > > > > > > > Just as a clarification to what you wrote and > the terminology > > > that you used, how exactly are you defining > a "Supernet," > > > particularly on this network? > > > > > > v/r, > > > > > > Paul Werner > > > > > > > I could be wrong here, but I would imagine > the reason this > > > works is that > > > > you > > > > have a supernet there, with the mask of > 255.255.248.0, so the > > > hosts > > > > address > > > > is not all-ones, so is not treated as a > broadcast address. > > > The host > > > > address > > > > includes 3 binary digits from the third > octet (125), so it > > > works out to > > > > be > > > > 101 11111111. I guess that zero saves it > from being a > > > broadacst > > > > address. > > > > > > > > Is this right, or did the Cable ISP just > screw up? > > > > > > > > Thomas Larus > > > > ""John Green"" wrote in message > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > > > the IP address alloted by the dhcp server > to my home > > > > > computer (via cable ie cable modem > connection) is > > > > > > > > > > IP address 24.15.125.255 > > > > > subnet mask 255.255.248.0 > > > > > def gw 24.15.125.1 > > > > > > > > > > ok look ar the last quad .... it is > 255 !!! > > > > > i can't believe this. > > > > > > > > > > do you how this is possible ? 0 and 255 > are rserved > > > > > for network and broadcast addresses..... > > > > > > > > > > please email me asap........... > > ________________________________________________ > Get your own "800" number > Voicemail, fax, email, and a lot more > http://www.ureach.com/reg/tag
Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=24384&t=24238 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
