CIDR Shorthand Question

Hi,

How do I correctly short-hand a block of IP addresses ranging from
xxx.xxx.xxx.105 to .110? My ISP provided a netmask of 255.255.255.248,
which I assume translates into xxx.xxx.xxx.105/29. However, shouldn't that
be /27?

Any input greatly appreciated.

Mike

Michael Ruebner <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> How do I correctly short-hand a block of IP addresses ranging from
> xxx.xxx.xxx.105 to .110? My ISP provided a netmask of 255.255.255.248,
> which I assume translates into xxx.xxx.xxx.105/29. However, shouldn't that
> be /27?
>
> Any input greatly appreciated.
>
> Mike

why /27? Who says this?

248 in binary is 11111

decimal 255.255.255.248
binary 11111111 11111111 11111111 11111000

so /29 is correct

or am i too drunk to understand your question?

--
I once played poker with tarot cards.
I got a full house and four people died.

Michael Ruebner <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> How do I correctly short-hand a block of IP addresses ranging from
> xxx.xxx.xxx.105 to .110? My ISP provided a netmask of 255.255.255.248,
> which I assume translates into xxx.xxx.xxx.105/29. However, shouldn't that
> be /27?
>
> Any input greatly appreciated.
>
> Mike

why /27? Who says this?

248 in binary is 11111000

decimal 255.255.255.248
binary 11111111 11111111 11111111 11111000

so /29 is correct

or am i too drunk to understand your question?

--
I once played poker with tarot cards.
I got a full house and four people died.

Michael Ruebner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> How do I correctly short-hand a block of IP addresses ranging from
> xxx.xxx.xxx.105 to .110? My ISP provided a netmask of 255.255.255.248,
> which I assume translates into xxx.xxx.xxx.105/29. However, shouldn't that
> be /27?


You got already the proper mask in another response.

The network covers actually addresses from x.x.x.104 to x.x.x.111,
where the .104 address is the network address and the .111 address
is the local area broadcast address.

The proper CIDR is x.x.x.104/29.

--

Tauno Voipio
tauno voipio (at) iki fi

Uli Wachowitz:

> so /29 is correct
>
> or am i too drunk to understand your question?

Hey, I can definitely relate to that approach ;-) Tauno cleared it up for
me. And, no, you weren't too drunk. I just missed a couple of classes at
school...

Thanks to you both.

Bests,

Mike