this post was submitted on 25 Mar 2024
85 points (96.7% liked)

[Outdated, please look at pinned post] Casual Conversation

6616 readers
1 users here now

Share a story, ask a question, or start a conversation about (almost) anything you desire. Maybe you'll make some friends in the process.


RULES

Related discussion-focused communities

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 21 points 5 months ago (5 children)

Class A/B/C in networking. I always wondered why there were classes if you would use a subnetmask regardless.

Took me a while to realize that class notation was only used before sub netmasks were a thing. The best you could do is to ignore them completely.

Networking is a wonderful field where you think you understand it until you look at the parts and realize you had it all wrong.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago (4 children)

The class notation is still meaningful. If we were talking about your particular network mask I might ask you what class it is. Telling me would give an understanding of size or hops or whatever. Granted, it is class C 99% of the time. Probably smaller. But then I’m certainly no networkologist.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 5 months ago

A subnet is defined by its netmask. Classes are useless nowadays IMHO.

At least for me they created more confusion than anything else. Why are there classes if the netmask defines the subnet size? Because there was a time before netmasks, just ignore them

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)