On September 30, 2005 12:09 am, kashani wrote:
> Ted Kaczmarek wrote:
> > Your initial post was 4 ip addresses from 10-13, their is no legal
> > subnet that contains only those four ip addresses.
> >
> > This time you posted 5 ip addresses from 186-190, again , no legal
> > subnet.
>
> 186-190 is s
Ted Kaczmarek wrote:
Your initial post was 4 ip addresses from 10-13, their is no legal
subnet that contains only those four ip addresses.
This time you posted 5 ip addresses from 186-190, again , no legal
subnet.
186-190 is starting to look like a subnet to me, x.x.x.184/29 to be exact.
D
On Thu, 2005-09-29 at 17:13 -0400, daniel wrote:
> On September 29, 2005 03:32 pm, Michael Kjorling wrote:
> > On 2005-09-29 15:19 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > I thought I could just allow Linux to forward the packets, but I couldn't
> > > figure out the routing since I'm not dealing with
On September 29, 2005 03:32 pm, Michael Kjorling wrote:
> On 2005-09-29 15:19 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > I thought I could just allow Linux to forward the packets, but I couldn't
> > figure out the routing since I'm not dealing with a whole subnet, only a
> > few allocated IPs.
>
> If a ne
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 2005-09-29 15:19 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I thought I could just allow Linux to forward the packets, but I couldn't
> figure out the routing since I'm not dealing with a whole subnet, only a few
> allocated IPs.
If a network delegation d
I'm having difficulty figuring out something that I think should be simple so
I was hoping some of the talented folk here could help me out:
Say I've been given the following public, routeable IPs to use:
123.123.123.10
123.123.123.11
123.123.123.12
123.123.123.13
And I want
6 matches
Mail list logo
