interface ethernet 0 ip address 192.168.0.0 mask 255.255.253.0
This is simply a supernet (aka classless) but *not* a non-contignous netmask. A non-contignous netmask would look like 255.254.255.0.
Nope, 255.255.253.0 binary is 11111111.11111111.11111101.00000000 which is non-contignous.
interface ethernet 0 ip address 192.168.0.0 mask 255.255.255.0 ip address 192.168.2.0 mask 255.255.255.0 secondary
which gives the same functionality with contigious netmasks.
Not really.
Agree, not exactly the same
> With the your second example hosts on the network have
to have different default gateways (192.168.0.1 and 192.168.2.1) depending in which network range they are. In your first example you just have one default gateway for all of them. However the netmask has to match on all hosts otherwise you run into all sorts of wierd trouble.
In this case, the above is normally only used during a migration phase (as I mentioned, this is the only use of non-contignous i've seen, joining two separate subnets), so the hosts already have the correct default-route in their subnet. Hosts could optionally then be migrated to a common subnet.
/Anders _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
