From owner-freebsd-questions  Tue Dec  5 12:56:42 2000
From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Dec  5 12:56:39 2000
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Received: from ptavv.es.net (ptavv.es.net [198.128.4.29])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB01B37B400
	for <questions@FreeBSD.ORG>; Tue,  5 Dec 2000 12:56:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ptavv.es.net (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by ptavv.es.net (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id eB5KuMJ24595;
	Tue, 5 Dec 2000 12:56:22 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <200012052056.eB5KuMJ24595@ptavv.es.net>
To: 01031149@3web.net
Cc: Alexander Anderson <a.anderson@utoronto.ca>,
	questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: Resolver issues 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 04 Dec 2000 20:04:32 MST."
             <20001205050624.BE13237B400@hub.freebsd.org> 
Date: Tue, 05 Dec 2000 12:56:22 -0800
From: "Kevin Oberman" <oberman@es.net>
Sender: oberman@ptavv.es.net
Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

> From: "Duke Normandin" <01031149@3web.net>
> Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2000 20:04:32 -0700
> Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
> 
> On  4 Dec 00 at 16:51, Alexander Anderson wrote:
> Hi...
> 
> >On Sun, Dec 03, 2000 at 09:17:41 PM or thereabouts, Crist J . Clark
> >wrote:
> >
> >> > $ ifconfig tun0 | grep "inet "
> >> >         inet 64.229.84.85 --> 64.229.84.1 netmask 0xffffff00 
> >>                                                     ^^^^^^^^^^
> >> Well that doesn't look right.
> >
> >Hmm, what should it be? I'll try to experiment with my network settings
> >then. And here's my ``ppp.conf'' by the way; does anything look strange
> >here?
> 
> I'm just a dumb newbie, so I might be totally wrong, but 64.229.84.85 
> looks an awful like a Class A address. If it is, the netmask s/b 255.0.0.0 
> or 0xff000000. Somebody horse-whip me if I'm out-to-lunch here....

There are no classfull addresses any more. 64 is being handed out in
the same chunks that other addresses have been handed out. Classless
addressing has been the norm in the Internet backbone for about 5
years. That said, I don't know if 0xffffff00 is the correct netmask,
but I do know that 0xff000000 is not correct.

I don't see any quick elimination of the "Class" references people
use. Even Cisco routers still tacitly recognize classfull nets by only
showing the prefix length when it does not match the traditional
classfull mask for that address. (Juniper gets it right!)

The proper way to specify a network is prefix/length.
E.g. 127.0.0.1/32, 128.1.0.0/22, 64.229.84.1.0/23.

But I think I'll pass on the horse-whipping. (Are you the whip or is
the horse? Either way it sound like animal cruelty.)


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message