Prev: Share clipboard and map network drive on rDesktop
Next: Ping and Tracert
From: antonio on 13 Apr 2008 09:18
hi
does have any sense this numbers?

10, may be, it's easy to remember for our decimal-sistem
192 it's the first of the C class... but why *168*?
and 172.16?

it seems random...
From: Dave Uhring on 13 Apr 2008 11:17
On Sun, 13 Apr 2008 15:18:46 +0200, antonio wrote:

> does have any sense this numbers?
>
> 10, may be, it's easy to remember for our decimal-sistem 192 it's the
> first of the C class... but why *168*? and 172.16?

Because those network blocks had not already been assigned by ICANN when
they reserved them?

> it seems random...

Only to random minds : >
From: Moe Trin on 13 Apr 2008 12:45
On Sun, 13 Apr 2008, in the Usenet newsgroup comp.os.linux.networking, in
article <4802096d$0$29603$4fafbaef(a)reader1.news.tin.it>, antonio wrote:

>does have any sense this numbers?

It was what was available.

>10, may be, it's easy to remember for our decimal-sistem

/8 (formerly called Class A) address ranges are limited. There were
only 128 in the original scheme, and they threw away two of those
(0.0.0.0/8 and 127.0.0.0/8) leaving 126. Today, 96 of them have been
assigned. See http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space. In
fact, 10.0.0.0/8 was the old DARPA address range and it was retired.
See RFC1627 for indications of the problems about the re-use of that
address range.

>192 it's the first of the C class... but why *168*?
>and 172.16?
>
>it seems random...

It's what was available. See RFC3330 for further hints. Address space
is in demand, which is why IPv6 was developed. As of last month, there
were 2609197794 IPv4 addresses in use - 70.4 percent of the available.
For perspective, the same figures for last December (3 months earlier),
were 2564407724 and 69.2 percent. At the end of 1993, about the time of
RFC1597 (which was replaced by RFC1918), the figures were 1233944064 and
33.3 percent, so one third of the address space was already in use.

Old guy
From: antonio on 13 Apr 2008 13:06
> It's random. So what?

it's random?
well! why?


(or is it a radom reason too?)
From: antonio on 13 Apr 2008 13:06
> Because those network blocks had not already been assigned by ICANN when
> they reserved them?

this is the best (and maybe the only...) hypothesis...
 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2
Prev: Share clipboard and map network drive on rDesktop
Next: Ping and Tracert