RE: LAB 9 CCIE Practical Studies VolumeII IP Multicast Chapter.

From: Scott Morris (swm@emanon.com)
Date: Wed Oct 19 2005 - 16:42:45 GMT-3

• Next message: pauls@hostworks.com.au: "OSPF loopback addresses shown as real subnet"
• Previous message: Wireman: "Re: Frame-Relay PPP issues? Help would be great!"
• Maybe in reply to: Hash Aminu: "LAB 9 CCIE Practical Studies VolumeII IP Multicast Chapter."
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

224.0.0.0/4 = 224.0.0.0 to 239.255.255.255 aka Class D addresses.
 
So there are 4 bits in the first octet that are "don't care" bits
(15.255.255.255 mask)
 
So to split it in half, I'd only use two of them! (7.255.255.255)
 
224.0.0.0 7.255.255.255
232.0.0.0 7.255.255.255
 
HTH,
 
Scott

  _____

From: Hash Aminu [mailto:hashng@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 2:46 PM
To: swm@emanon.com
Cc: Group Study
Subject: Re: LAB 9 CCIE Practical Studies VolumeII IP Multicast Chapter.

scott , the binary is fuzy on the multicast on the LAB 9, u said that the
overal range of the mcast is 224.0.0.0/4 but i thot its /8. anyway could you
please make things clear as par the binary manipulations you did there.
TIA
Hashiru

• Next message: pauls@hostworks.com.au: "OSPF loopback addresses shown as real subnet"
• Previous message: Wireman: "Re: Frame-Relay PPP issues? Help would be great!"
• Maybe in reply to: Hash Aminu: "LAB 9 CCIE Practical Studies VolumeII IP Multicast Chapter."
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Nov 06 2005 - 22:00:51 GMT-3