Newsgroups: comp.dcom.sys.cisco
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!csn!boulder!recnews
From: Greg Satz <satz@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: backplane backbone, routing or bridging? 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 26 Jun 91 08:34:29 PDT."
             <CMM.0.90.2.677950469.vaf@Valinor.Stanford.EDU> 
Message-ID: <9106270622.AA10526@wolf.cisco.com>
Sender: news@colorado.edu
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: 26 Jun 91 23:24:22 MDT
Return-Path: <cisco-request@spot.Colorado.EDU>
Lines: 15

>> Greg,
>>   I don't think there's anything illegal about having multiple subnets on the
>> same cable with different subnet masks provided that all routers agree on the
>> subnet/mask pairs. OSPF with variable-length subnet masks should be able to
>> handle this.
>> 
>> 	--Vince

Exactly why this should be written down somewhere. It is enough of a change
to the IP architecture that word of mouth can lead to interesting
interopable incompatibilities. Jeff Mogul did a good job of describing how
subnetting should work. Who is going to augment it with the variable length
changes?

Greg