home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.dcom.sys.cisco
- Path: sparky!uunet!boulder!recnews
- From: rv@deins.informatik.uni-dortmund.de
- Subject: Re: Subnetting and class B nets
- In-Reply-To: Your message of Fri, 28 Aug 92 01:35:35 +1000.
- <7897.714929735@munnari.oz.au>
- Message-ID: <9208271721.AA07530@meins.informatik.uni-dortmund.de>
- Sender: news@colorado.edu
- Date: 27 Aug 92 19:21:34 N
- Lines: 42
-
- > Date: 27 Aug 92 16:36:57+0200
- > From: Peter Merdian <merdian@rus.uni-stuttgart.dbp.de>
- > Message-ID: <2299*merdian@rus.uni-stuttgart.dbp.de>
- >
- > According to RFC 950 only one subnetmask is allowed for an IP network:
- >
- > I don't think this is true - RFC950 is not highly clear on
- > the point, but it does seem to suggest that different masks
- > on different interfaces is possible - and it never says that
- > that should only happen if the different interfaces are on
- > different nets.
- >
- > The problem was never really the spec, but the implementations,
- > which with any luck will be gradually getting fixed.
- well, I hear of systems manufactured today (but not by Cisco:-) still
- not supporting subnet masks - so fixing can take quite some while.
-
- Regarding the subnet support on Cisco routers:
-
- - I remember old releases that copied the subnet mask specified from the
- "address" config command to all interfaces connected to subnets of the
- same common net - thus enforcing a common mask
-
- - I think recent releases allow to configure different masks;
-
- I think I did not see any documentation telling about
- - the old restriction
- - removal of the restriction
- - explanation what the routers actually are doing now with different masks
- (just straight forward the right thing?)
-
- - Ruediger
-
-
- Ruediger Volk
- Universitaet Dortmund, Informatik IRB DE-NIC
- Postfach 500 500
- D-W-4600 Dortmund 50
- Germany
-
- E-Mail: rv@Informatik.Uni-Dortmund.DE
- Phone: +49 231 755 4760 Fax: +49 231 755 2386
-