Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!caen!uflorida!mlb.semi.harris.com!soleil!sisun1!gopstein
From: gopstein@sisun1.squibb.com (Rich Gopstein)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.sys.cisco
Subject: Subnet 0
Message-ID: <1120@soleil.UUCP>
Date: 26 Nov 90 13:22:43 GMT
Sender: news@soleil.UUCP
Reply-To: gopstein@sisun1.squibb.com (Rich Gopstein)
Organization: Bristol-Myers Squibb PRI, Lawrenceville, NJ
Lines: 27

We currently have a flat (non-subnetted) class-B network connected
via bridges.  At the moment, the number of machines talking IP is
less than 150, so they are all numbered 140.176.0.x.  We would like
to start subnetting our network with a subnet mask of 255.255.255.0
by replacing one of the bridges with a router, changing the netmask,
and renumbering the machines on the new subnet to 140.176.1.x (leaving
the machines on the rest of the net numbered 140.176.0.x).

The problem is that our cisco technical contact (in the local sales office)
claims that we have to renumber all of the 140.176.0.x machines since
zero is not legal in the subnetted portion of the address (ie the third
octet)...  We asked him whether he meant the HOST portion of the address,
but he said that he really meant the third octet.

This doesn't make sense to me.  Is there a reason that a zero in the
subnetted portion of the address will cause cisco routers a problem? 


Rich Gopstein
gopstein@squibb.com
rutgers!squibb.com!gopstein

--
Rich Gopstein

gopstein@squibb.com
.!rutgers!gopstein%squibb.com