From: Con Spathas (con@spathas.net)
Date: Tue Jul 31 2007 - 22:41:29 ART
The example implies to me that the remote end would have the IP of
172.16.70.3/31.
Personally my take on it is unless the task said something like 'use the
least possible IP addresses' or something like that I'd stick with the
X.X.X.0/30, but I'd probably clarify with a Proctor tbh.
Besides I'm a lab virgin so I'd probably wait for a veteran to respond on
their take on it.
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of Toh
Soon, Lim
Sent: Wednesday, 1 August 2007 02:17
To: Antonio Soares
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: 31-bit Prefixes on IPv4 Point-to-Point Links
Hi Antonio,
Yup, seen this technote before. If you notice the IP address 172.16.70.2
255.255.255.254, I think it's incorrect. It's outside the range.
Back to my original post, given the question would you configure /30 or /31?
Or clarify with the proctor? :)
Thank you.
B.Rgds,
Lim TS
On 8/1/07, Antonio Soares <amsoares@netcabo.pt> wrote:
>
> Check this document:
>
>
> http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios122/122new
> ft/122
> t/122t2/ft31addr.htm
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Antonio Soares
> CCIE #18473, CCNP, CCIP
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
> Of Toh Soon, Lim
> Sent: quarta-feira, 1 de Agosto de 2007 1:33
> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: 31-bit Prefixes on IPv4 Point-to-Point Links
>
> Hi All,
>
> If the question is phrased as follows:
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ------
> ----
> Configure the Serial link between R7 and R8 with PPP encapsulation and
> place on the 150.50.102.0 subnet.
> This configuration should support only R7 and R8 as viable hosts on
> this subnet.
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ------
> ----
>
> Should I configure the link as /30 or /31? If I go with 31-bit prefix,
> the IP addresses would be 150.50.102.0/31 and 150.50.102.1/31.
>
> By the way, are 31-bit prefixes commonly used in the real-world to
> address point-to-point links? I have learned of its advantages e.g.
> conserving IP addresses, elimination of directed broadcast address,
> etc. Are there any disadvantages?
>
>
> Thank you.
>
> B.Rgds,
> Lim TS
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> _ Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Aug 18 2007 - 08:17:42 ART