Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ulysses!ucbvax!tcp-ip
From: tcp-ip@ucbvax.ARPA
Newsgroups: fa.tcp-ip
Subject: subnet addresses
Message-ID: <9394@ucbvax.ARPA>
Date: Sat, 27-Jul-85 18:51:45 EDT
Article-I.D.: ucbvax.9394
Posted: Sat Jul 27 18:51:45 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 29-Jul-85 07:05:48 EDT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA
Organization: University of California at Berkeley
Lines: 15

From: Charles Hedrick <HEDRICK@RUTGERS.ARPA>

We have heard a rumor that some people consider subnet zero to be
illegal.  Since our current hosts are 128.6.0.x, and we are about to
need to move to subnetting, this is an obvious concern to us.  We
haven't seen this in the proposed subnet RFC, but it has shown up in
one piece of code that claimed to implement subnetting.  As I read
it, there is special meaning attached to
   0.0.0.0  - I don't know who I am
   0.0.0.x  - i.e. all bits under the subnet mask (network number 
	plus subnet number) are zero - I don't know what net I am on
   x.y.z.0  - I know what net I'm on, but not who I am
But I do not see any constraints on the subnet number itself.  Am I
missing something?
-------