Johnny Billquist wrote:
> Geert Hendrickx wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 12:46:11PM +0100, Andreas Haßfeld wrote:
>>
>>> inet 192.168.1.2 netmask 0xffffffc0 broadcast 192.168.1.255
>>>
>>> could it be that your netmask is borked? Shouldn't it be 0xffffff00 for
>>> that broadcast address?
>>
>> Why would that be wrong?  It's just a private /26 subnet.
> 
> It is wrong because the broadcast address, the netmask, and the IP 
> address are related, and cannot be chosen randomly. In fact, given the 
> IP address and the network mask, you can calculate the broadcast 
> address, and with the above values, the broadcast address will *not* be 
> 192.168.1.255.
> It should in fact be 192.168.1.63, so either the netmask should be 
> changed, or the broadcast address should be changed. Pick one.
> 
>     Johnny

That's what I meant, broadcast address and netmask don't fit to each 
other. Since /26 subnets are quite uncommon on private class c nets, I 
decided to suggest to adjust the netmask.

Yours,
Andreas