>> OK, I'm thinking it's a subnet mask, and the significance of 255 is >> easy to figure. 240 and 252 less so, but at least they are within >> range. But 257? > I have encountered many people who don't believe in non-contiguous > subnet masks.
Believe in them?! I've *seen* them! (Actually, for a while I was using a netmask of 0xffffffd8 for my house LAN. One of the things I dislike about IPv6 is the desupport for noncontiguous netmasks - I can understand it, but I don't like it.) > To be fair, a number of OSes don't support them anymore. Eww! My reaction, were I ever to run into that, would be the same as to any other bug in the network stack.... /~\ The ASCII der Mouse \ / Ribbon Campaign X Against HTML [EMAIL PROTECTED] / \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B _______________________________________________ Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
