--- beecher@beecher.cc wrote: From: Tom Beecher <beecher@beecher.cc> It's good to have at least a passing understanding of the old terminology simply because documentation for newer stuff likes to reference it... -------------------------------------- Plus it's fun (and informative about a netgeek's skill) when they call, say, 72.234.7.0/24 a Class C and you can say no it's not. Then you see if they can say why. If they can't, well...ummm... I really mess with them after that. It helps pass the work day. >;-) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classful_network#Classful_addressing_definitio... scott ps. Be sure to send Wikipedia a small Christmas gift. It's invaluable.
On 12/18/2018 11:44 AM, Scott Weeks wrote:
It's good to have at least a passing understanding of the old terminology simply because documentation for newer stuff likes to reference it...
Agreed. I seldom see people actually talking about class {A,B,C,D,E} networks as such. It's almost always a reference to the size ~> netmask ~> prefix of a network.
Plus it's fun (and informative about a netgeek's skill) when they call, say, 72.234.7.0/24 a Class C and you can say no it's not. Then you see if they can say why. If they can't, well...ummm... I really mess with them after that. It helps pass the work day. >;-)
You can safely say that 72.234.7.0/24 is a Class C /sized/ network. While it happens to be in the (former) Class A IP /range/. But it is most decidedly /not/ a Class A /network/.
ps. Be sure to send Wikipedia a small Christmas gift. It's invaluable.
Agreed! -- Grant. . . . unix || die
participants (2)
-
Grant Taylor -
Scott Weeks