Subnetting

> Not using IPV6 and not giving a fuck how many you waste because they're practically infinite

>>57877246
>he IPv6 will be mainstream anytime soon

Cisco subnetting curriculum is like 85% IPv4 and 15% IPv6. I don't even think I know how to subnet IPv6.

>>57877224
That graphic irks me, Class C addresses are only submittable at the 4th octet, changing the third is changing to another network

>>57879445
subnettable

>>57879452
>classes
>2016

Classful adressing is gone since over two decades and was replaced with CIDR (classless interdomain routing). Any instructors who keep implying that network classes still matter rather than having a purely historical context should kill themselves.

192.168.0.0/16 is the third private address block, and you can use it in whatever way you like, be it a single /16 network, or 32768 /31 networks (yes, a /31 netmask exists, and should be used for point-to-point links in place of /30 whenever possible as at doesn't waste half the address space).

>>57877273
Subnetting ipv6 is way easier.

>>57877246
>>57880035

IPv6 hasn't been widely implemented for decades, and meming edgy 20-year-olds aren't going to change that either. Anybody who's sane isn't going to give up manageable IPv4 in favor of the clusterfuck that is IPv6.

>>57880035
Subnetting IPv4 is very easy unless you're a moron who can't memorize a hadful powers of 2, grasp a simple concept, and a method to apply it.

>>57879445
so? the green and blue are class C (cidr >= 24)

the red host is "class b" and its nodes are two different networks, nothing wrong there

>>57880017
is a /31 for broadcast networks with no collision detection? I can't see the point of having a single host address on a network otherwise...

>>57877224
Two /29s and a /28. How is that hard?

>>57882276
Reread anon's post dipshit. It's for point to point networks. Vendors implement it in such a way that each host inherently knows there is only one other host on the network.