[lkml]   [1997]   [Jan]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Is netmask illigal?
On Sat, 11 Jan 1997 22:46:39 -0500 (EST), 
Eugene Kanter <> wrote:
>kernel 2.1.20
>ifconfig eth0 netmask broadcast
>SIOCSIFNETMASK: Invalid argument
>What is wrong?
>Did I do something not right or it is kernel bug?

netmask only leaves 1 bit host addresses. Since you
must have a network (all bits 0) and a broadcast address (all bits 1),
this leaves no room for hosts. 2.1.20 checks and rejects this. If you
really mean a broadcast address of then your netmask
should be

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:38    [W:0.089 / U:1.440 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site