Opened 19 years ago
Last modified 19 years ago
#1663 closed defect
IP Address tables are confusing — at Version 5
| Reported by: | Owned by: | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | lowest | Milestone: | 6.2 |
| Component: | Book | Version: | SVN |
| Severity: | normal | Keywords: | |
| Cc: |
Description (last modified by )
Class Networks
A 10.0.0.0 B 172.16.0.0 through 172.31.0.255 C 192.168.0.0 through 192.168.255.255
What shall the table show?
Adresses in networks or network addresses?
Network adresses would be
Class Networks
A 10.0.0.0 B 172.16.0.0 through 172.31.0.0 C 192.168.0.0 through 192.168.255.0
Change History (5)
comment:1 by , 19 years ago
comment:2 by , 19 years ago
Ignore my last comment. We don't show a valid range for the 10.0.0.0/8 network either.
I'm moving this to lfs-dev. Some more advanced network layout discussion is required.
comment:3 by , 19 years ago
| Summary: | I'm screwed by the table → IP Address tables are confusing |
|---|
comment:4 by , 19 years ago
| Version: | TESTING → SVN |
|---|
comment:5 by , 19 years ago
| Description: | modified (diff) |
|---|---|
| Milestone: | → 6.2 |
Note:
See TracTickets
for help on using tickets.
Read the preceding sentence again:
make sure that the IP address is in the private network IP address range. Valid ranges are:
<table here>
The table lists all the valid IP addresses. Granted it lists the network and broadcast addresses on the outer fringes too. Maybe that ought to be changed.