400 Hosts...

Hi all,

How do I name in my project 400 hosts ? My network address is

192.168.24.0. Would it be like this:

First IP - 192.168.24.1 Last IP - 192.168.25.254 Both Mask - 255.255.252.0

Am I correct ?

Reply to
Paulo Takeda
Loading thread data ...

Hi all,

How do I name in my project 400 hosts ? My network address is

192.168.24.0. Would it be like this:

First IP - 192.168.24.1 Last IP - 192.168.25.254 Both Mask - 255.255.252.0

Am I correct ?

Reply to
Paulo Takeda

minimum mask would be 255.255.254.0 (510 useable addresses)

what you have would work, but you have allowed for 1022 addresses.

>
Reply to
stephen

Hi Stephen !

I am trying to simulate this environment but Packet Tracer 4.0 does not allow to set this mask for this IP !

stephen escreveu:

Reply to
Paulo Takeda

Try using a 172.16.x.x or a 10.x.x.x

Reply to
John Agosta

then that is a bug since the mask is valid - try setting it on a real device such as a PC......

Reply to
stephen

A 192.168 address will require at least a 24 bit mask.

Reply to
John Agosta

unless you use "ip classless"

or just any (non cisco) box that doesnt default to rules which are more than

10 years out of date :)
Reply to
stephen

Reply to
Alan S

Is this not some form of "simulator?" Perhaps the the 'sim' wants the operator to stay within another set of rules.....

Reply to
John Agosta

You cannot say it is a "class c" without the associated mask. It may look like one, it my be generally accepted that addresses in that range would normally be a /24, but it is an unsafe assumption.

These days make sure you always write the mask with a network address.

P.

Reply to
Paul Matthews

could be.

so - either it is a "cisco" simulator (or why use this group) - in which case ip classless is fairly key to understanding how a cisco handles IP once you get past the basics.

or it isnt - in which case there should be a set of rules somewhere to check....

FWIW i think it more likely it is broken rather than operating a different rule set.

Reply to
stephen

thats true as far as it goes - but "class" based addressing hasnt been best practice for a long time - ever since internet address space allocations of "bunch of class C" (or set of /24) numbers became common.

shame that most intro IP texts still seem to introduce addressing using classes before they get to the simpler more flexible classless stuff.

Reply to
stephen

I think we are saying the same thing.

Reply to
John Agosta

Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.