Re: netmasks

2002-09-22 Thread Tom Cook
On 0, Martin Clarke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > a question i was asked recently on a topic that I thought > i understood untill i was asked > > Given the hypothetical subnet 136.206.16.128 and netmask 255.255.255.128, > state the valid range of IP addresses that could be assigned to hosts o

Re: netmasks

2002-09-22 Thread David B Harris
On Sat, 21 Sep 2002 14:33:06 + Martin Clarke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > a question i was asked recently on a topic that I thought > i understood untill i was asked > > Given the hypothetical subnet 136.206.16.128 and netmask > 255.255.255.128, state the valid range of IP addresses that

Re: netmasks

2002-09-22 Thread Jason Lunz
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > Given the hypothetical subnet 136.206.16.128 and netmask 255.255.255.128, > state the valid range of IP addresses that could be assigned to hosts on > the subnet?(also another was 64.122.34.83 & netmask 255.255.255.240 :( ) > > i was used to looking at plain netmasks i

Re: netmasks

2002-09-22 Thread Jeff
Martin Clarke, 2002-Sep-21 14:33 +: > a question i was asked recently on a topic that I thought > i understood untill i was asked > > Given the hypothetical subnet 136.206.16.128 and netmask 255.255.255.128, > state the valid range of IP addresses that could be assigned to hosts on > the