> me second. 192.168.1.1/24 just makes me confused with 192.168.1.1/32 > which is a real host address.
Interesting.
I can't remember ever seeing 192.168.1.1/32 used. In my my part of the
world, it's only meaningful as a degenerate form: all the syntaxes I've
seen which accept the IP/NN notation also accept just IP to mean IP/32,
so writing IP/32 is just more verbose and half-confusing (makes you
wonder why the guy bothered to add /32).
:-)
Stefan
