IRX with 2 class "C"
Cor Bosman (cor@xs4all.net)
Tue, 17 Oct 1995 17:36:14 +0100
>
>
>Mike:
> I can't help you much with specifics on the IRX, but I don't believe
>that a netmask of 255.255.255.128 is going to be valid. Since the first
>and last subnets of a class C are reserved, you would have no useable
>subnets.
> If you use non-subnetted class C's on either side of the router, you
>should use a netmask of 255.255.255.0 (unless there's something funny
>about the IRX or your connections to it).
> If you subnet the class C, you need to make sure that all subnets of
>the class C are contiguous (not separated by another network number).
> If you do subnet it, you need to determine how many addresses and
>subnets you need. If you use a netmask of 255.255.255.192, you would
>have 4 subnets, 2 of which are reserved. Each subnet would have 64
>addresses of which the first and last are reserved netting you 62
>addresses per subnet or 124 total addresses out of the 256 address class
>C. Smaller subnets may net you more useable addresses if you need to be
>more efficient.
Another reason why Livingston needs to hurry up with classless routing
on their equipment. I use first and last subnet all the time, but
thats cause ciscos have no problem with it anymore.
Cor
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Cor Bosman | ____Xs4all Public Access____ | tel: +31-(0)20-622-2885 |
| cor@xs4all.net | Network Administrator | fax: +31-(0)20-622-2753 |
------------------The net routes around censorship---------------------SP4.99-