DLSK12 wrote: » I have a question, my teacher gave me a complete different answer and says i'm wrong.. Who is correct and why? I got this answer:Network: 128.1.2.3 (you need 68 hosts with as many subnets as posssible) (calculate for the 2nd available subnet)Subnet Mask: 255.255.255.128Subnet Address: 128.1.2.128F: 128.1.2.129L: 128.1.2.254B: 128.1.2.255 The teacher got:Network: 128.1.2.3 (you need 68 hosts with as many subnets as posssible) (calculate for the 2nd available subnet)Subnet Mask: 255.255.255.128Subnet Address: 128.1.1.0F: 128.1.1.1L: 128.1.1.126B: 128.1.1.127
Priston wrote: » Your both wrong! The 128.1.2.3 network is a class B network which is really 128.1.0.0/16 128.1.0.0/16 will be subnetted into multiple /25 128.1.0.0/25 is the first subnet 128.1.0.128/25 is the Second subnet F 128.1.0.129 L 128.1.0.254 B 128.1.0.255 128.1.1.0/25 is the third subnet 128.1.2.128/25 is the sixth subnet
Deathmage wrote: » it should be this: Network ID Range (1st) Range (last) Broadcast 128.1.2.0 128.1.2.1 128.1.2.126 128.1.2.127 128.1.2.128 128.1.2.129 128.1.2.255 128.1.2.256
tpasmall wrote: » That second broadcast IP is impossible. The OP has it right, his teacher is wrong.
ibn_shaddad wrote: » 128.1.2.0 128.1.2.128 <<<< so here it goes your second subnet! 128.1.3.0 128.1.3.128 ...
Deathmage wrote: » To me this would only be valid if the mask was 255.255.0.0
Network: 128.1.0.3 (you need 68 hosts with as many subnets as posssible) (calculate for the 2nd available subnet)
Network: 128.1.2.3 (you need 68 hosts with as many subnets as posssible) (calculate for the 2nd available subnet)
Priston wrote: » Why did you skip 128.1.0.0, 128.1.0.128, 128.1.1.0, 128.1.1.128? The mask is 255.255.0.0 IPv4 subnetting reference - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia B 10 128.0.0.0 191.255.255.255 255.255.0.0 /16 With the Cisco curriculum you have to assume it's a classful network unless they tell you otherwise. If no subnet mask is given in the question that means it's a classful network and your converting it to a classless network. I think you guys are just letting this trick question trick you. has the same answers as They both are IPs that start out in the same network before you subnet the network.
Deathmage wrote: » But it's clearly being stated as a 255.255.255.128 in the OP original post. Unless it's stipulates that's it's a 255.255.0.0 then why else would you put it as a 255.255.255.128. Masks don't lie.
ibn_shaddad wrote: » Guys guys, clearly the question is not poorly written, but it is not written at all! all what the OP gave us was the answers, not the question. But it is fair enough for us to know the IP address and the subnet mask. The subnet mask was mentioned two time, (Subnet Mask: 255.255.255.12 one by the teacher and another by the OP. Since the S/M is the same, then we can take it as a given info and move on.
NetworkNewb wrote: » The same problem was posted in another thread on the same day, but stated the question better than the OP did here. Same issue though, the teacher does it wrong and question is worded poorly. The question is to calculate the 2nd subnet...The other thread shows the beginning info given. This OP did not. Don't care enough to find other thread right now though since the end result is the same. The teacher is wrong
Jon_Cisco wrote: » I believe if you read the entire question you might reconsider your answer. I can't believe this thread is still open but the 3rd subnet is the second usable subnet when given the requirements. They are instructing you not to use subnet zero. This is not how you would do it now but that was the question.