how many addresses possible
Greetings (My head is swimming with all the explanations on IP routing - - - have spent about 3 hours now looking at various documents - - - - I just can't find a clear answer. The first statement is my present network - - - I'm trying to figure out how to move beyond the access of only 254 devices at one time. Please - - - this is not my business - - - - I'm just using a highly connected system design idea in the planning and trying to figure out how to get what I would like - - - done. ) If I set up a router using the 192.168.1.1 I can access some 254 distinct IP addresses from my router. If I set up a router using the 176.10.1.1 how many distinct IP addresses can I access? (I'm thinking some 64k worth but dunno!) TIA
On Sat, 29 Apr 2023 at 16:04, o1bigtenor via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:
If I set up a router using the 176.10.1.1 how many distinct IP addresses can I access?
(I'm thinking some 64k worth but dunno!)
Correct, except you can't use all 1s or all 0s as a host address, so 64k-2. -- Scott
On Sat, Apr 29, 2023 at 13:04 o1bigtenor via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:
Greetings
(My head is swimming with all the explanations on IP routing - - - have spent about 3 hours now looking at various documents - - - - I just can't find a clear answer. The first statement is my present network - - - I'm trying to figure out how to move beyond the access of only 254 devices at one time. Please - - - this is not my business - - - - I'm just using a highly connected system design idea in the planning and trying to figure out how to get what I would like - - - done. )
If I set up a router using the 192.168.1.1 I can access some 254 distinct IP addresses from my router.
If I set up a router using the 176.10.1.1 how many distinct IP addresses can I access?
(I'm thinking some 64k worth but dunno!)
You can access as many addresses as you want from your router. The address block is determined by the subnet mask. Take a look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_network You will want to avoid 176, instead look at the 172.16. range or the entire 192.168.x.x range ( subnet mask will be 255.255.0.0) Hope that helps Dhaval
TIA --- Post to this mailing list talk@gtalug.org Unsubscribe from this mailing list https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
On Sat, 29 Apr 2023 at 16:04, o1bigtenor via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:
If I set up a router using the 176.10.1.1 how many distinct IP addresses can I access?
Note that for a local private LAN, you shouldn't use 176.10.x.x The range allocated for private LANs is 172.16.x.x to 172.31.x.x Now it's time for James K. to tell you about IPV6 and the billions of addresses you can use. -- Scott
Here is an OK set of videos on how IPv4 addressing works: Pt. 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ddM9AcreVqY Pt. 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQ3T14SIlV4 Pt. 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xlzlgYGqW8 Just try to not pay attention to his millennial bro-ism and excessive use of the word "engineer".
On Apr 29, 2023, at 16:04, o1bigtenor via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:
Greetings
(My head is swimming with all the explanations on IP routing - - - have spent about 3 hours now looking at various documents - - - - I just can't find a clear answer. The first statement is my present network - - - I'm trying to figure out how to move beyond the access of only 254 devices at one time. Please - - - this is not my business - - - - I'm just using a highly connected system design idea in the planning and trying to figure out how to get what I would like - - - done. )
If I set up a router using the 192.168.1.1 I can access some 254 distinct IP addresses from my router.
If I set up a router using the 176.10.1.1 how many distinct IP addresses can I access?
(I'm thinking some 64k worth but dunno!)
TIA --- Post to this mailing list talk@gtalug.org Unsubscribe from this mailing list https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
On 2023-04-29 16:04, o1bigtenor via talk wrote:
If I set up a router using the 192.168.1.1 I can access some 254 distinct IP addresses from my router.
If I set up a router using the 176.10.1.1 how many distinct IP addresses can I access?
You're looking at the wrong numbers. What determines the max is the subnet mask, no matter the address range. So, a /24 gives you 254 usable addresses, etc.. Also, forget about address classes. They've been obsolete for over 30 years. Now, if you really want to have fun, a LAN on IPv6 will have 18.4 billion, billion addresses available.
On Sat, 29 Apr 2023 at 16:31, James Knott via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:
Also, forget about address classes. They've been obsolete for over 30 years.
That said, sticking with class sized masks and matching the network numbers for class based networks tends to simplify addressing and make things less confusing. -- Scott
On 2023-04-29 16:39, Scott Allen wrote:
Also, forget about address classes. They've been obsolete for over 30 years. That said, sticking with class sized masks and matching the network numbers for class based networks tends to simplify addressing and make things less confusing.
That's only true because people have learned a lot of bad habits with IPv4. Also, originally, all IPv4 addresses had the same size subnet, /8. As that allowed only 256 networks, address classes were introduced, to provide more, smaller networks. Then even that proved inadequate, so Classless InterDomain Routing (CIDR) was introduced which is what we've been using for decades. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classless_Inter-Domain_Routing
On Sat, 29 Apr 2023 at 17:39, James Knott <james.knott@jknott.net> wrote:
That's only true because people have learned a lot of bad habits with IPv4.
No, it's because IPv4 addresses are annotated as x.x.x.x Sticking with class size masks makes it easy to separate the network address part from the device address part. -- Scott
On 2023-04-29 17:48, Scott Allen wrote:
On Sat, 29 Apr 2023 at 17:39, James Knott <james.knott@jknott.net> wrote:
That's only true because people have learned a lot of bad habits with IPv4. No, it's because IPv4 addresses are annotated as x.x.x.x Sticking with class size masks makes it easy to separate the network address part from the device address part.
But then we get to the situation that led to the question in this thread, where people think the available addresses depends on which address range they're working with. As long as the subnet size fits within the allocated space, there is no problem. However it is better to think of address space in terms of need. For most, that would be a /24, as is commonly provided. It makes absolutely no difference whether that /24 is in the 192.168.0.0 /16 or 10.0.0.0 /8 blocks. If you really need more, then just think of subnet mask size.
On Sat, Apr 29, 2023 at 8:20 PM James Knott via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:
On 2023-04-29 17:48, Scott Allen wrote:
On Sat, 29 Apr 2023 at 17:39, James Knott <james.knott@jknott.net> wrote:
That's only true because people have learned a lot of bad habits with IPv4. No, it's because IPv4 addresses are annotated as x.x.x.x Sticking with class size masks makes it easy to separate the network address part from the device address part.
But then we get to the situation that led to the question in this thread, where people think the available addresses depends on which address range they're working with. As long as the subnet size fits within the allocated space, there is no problem. However it is better to think of address space in terms of need. For most, that would be a /24, as is commonly provided. It makes absolutely no difference whether that /24 is in the 192.168.0.0 /16 or 10.0.0.0 /8 blocks. If you really need more, then just think of subnet mask size.
This sounds like a reasonable solution until you actually set up the router. On 192.168.0.0 - - - - well I haven't found a way to talk directly to more than 254 devices - - - - or have you? Now if you want to blow a lot of money on routers you could have a router for each of the 253 addresses in 192.168.a.x (the "a" section) - - - then you would need one more router to manage all the other routers - - - - which to me seems rather redundant power hungry and not worth my time. Regards
On 2023-04-30 10:35, o1bigtenor via talk wrote:
This sounds like a reasonable solution until you actually set up the router. On 192.168.0.0 - - - - well I haven't found a way to talk directly to more than 254 devices - - - - or have you?
Now if you want to blow a lot of money on routers you could have a router for each of the 253 addresses in 192.168.a.x (the "a" section) - - - then you would need one more router to manage all the other routers - - - - which to me seems rather redundant power hungry and not worth my time.
???? There's a lot more to routers than the typical D-Link SOHO router, where /24 is typical. I run pfSense, which is in many ways comparable to routers from Cisco, etc. I can choose whatever subnet size I want on IPv4. On IPv6 it's always /64. Larger networks might very well have more than 254 devices attached. Of course, you don't want too many, as there will be a lot of broadcast noise. There's no such thing as broadcasts on IPv6.
On Sun, Apr 30, 2023 at 09:35:04AM -0500, o1bigtenor via talk wrote:
This sounds like a reasonable solution until you actually set up the router. On 192.168.0.0 - - - - well I haven't found a way to talk directly to more than 254 devices - - - - or have you?
Now if you want to blow a lot of money on routers you could have a router for each of the 253 addresses in 192.168.a.x (the "a" section) - - - then you would need one more router to manage all the other routers - - - - which to me seems rather redundant power hungry and not worth my time.
Certainly my router has a field for specifying the subnet size when configuring the local network. Seems perfectly common. Now if you use your AP provided by Bell with the default config, then yes it will be a /24 and they might not make it easy to change the config, but it almost certainly can be done. -- Len Sorensen
On 2023-04-29 17:39, James Knott wrote:
That's only true because people have learned a lot of bad habits with IPv4. Also, originally, all IPv4 addresses had the same size subnet, /8. As that allowed only 256 networks, address classes were introduced, to provide more, smaller networks. Then even that proved inadequate, so Classless InterDomain Routing (CIDR) was introduced which is what we've been using for decades.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classless_Inter-Domain_Routing
Here's a bit more info: "Versions 2 and 3, and a draft of version 4, allowed an address length of up to 128 bits,[6] but this was mistakenly[citation needed] reduced to 32 bits in the final version of IPv4." Vint Cerf, one of the creators of IP said he intended the address space was to be much larger. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Protocol
On 2023-04-29 17:39, James Knott wrote:
Also, originally, all IPv4 addresses had the same size subnet, /8
This is shown in this document, about an early version of IPv4. It's shown in the diagram on page 1 and the text on page 3, which describe the network (8 bits) and host (24 bits) portions of the 32 bit address. Address classes came later and CIDR later still. https://www.rfc-editor.org/ien/ien44.pdf
On Sat, Apr 29, 2023 at 3:31 PM James Knott via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:
On 2023-04-29 16:04, o1bigtenor via talk wrote:
If I set up a router using the 192.168.1.1 I can access some 254 distinct IP addresses from my router.
If I set up a router using the 176.10.1.1 how many distinct IP addresses can I access?
You're looking at the wrong numbers. What determines the max is the subnet mask, no matter the address range. So, a /24 gives you 254 usable addresses, etc.. Also, forget about address classes. They've been obsolete for over 30 years.
Now, if you really want to have fun, a LAN on IPv6 will have 18.4 billion, billion addresses available.
Perhaps you might persuade my ISP to get their collective posteriors in gear - - - yes? Regards
| From: James Knott via talk <talk@gtalug.org> | If you're on Rogers, you get 2 IPv4 addresses. As far as I know, only if you turn off the router function of your Rogers-supplied box (modem/router/AP/...).
On 2023-04-29 16:04, o1bigtenor via talk wrote:
(My head is swimming with all the explanations on IP routing - - - have spent about 3 hours now looking at various documents - - - - I just can't find a clear answer. The first statement is my present network - - - I'm trying to figure out how to move beyond the access of only 254 devices at one time.
The Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) has assigned several address ranges to be used by private networks. Address ranges to be use by private networks are: Class A: 10.0.0.0 to 10.255.255.255 Class B: 172.16.0.0 to 172.31.255.255 Class C: 192.168.0.0 to 192.168.255.255 If 0 and 255 should not be used for the last number then the 192 block gives you 254 address, 172.16 gives you 65534, and 10 gives you 16777214 addresses. -- Cheers! Kevin. https://www.patreon.com/KevinCozens | "Nerds make the shiny things that | distract the mouth-breathers, and Owner of Elecraft K2 #2172 | that's why we're powerful" #include <disclaimer/favourite> | --Chris Hardwick
On 2023-04-29 21:18, Kevin Cozens via talk wrote:
On 2023-04-29 16:04, o1bigtenor via talk wrote:
(My head is swimming with all the explanations on IP routing - - - have spent about 3 hours now looking at various documents - - - - I just can't find a clear answer. The first statement is my present network - - - I'm trying to figure out how to move beyond the access of only 254 devices at one time.
The Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) has assigned several address ranges to be used by private networks.
Address ranges to be use by private networks are: Class A: 10.0.0.0 to 10.255.255.255 Class B: 172.16.0.0 to 172.31.255.255 Class C: 192.168.0.0 to 192.168.255.255
If 0 and 255 should not be used for the last number then the 192 block gives you 254 address, 172.16 gives you 65534, and 10 gives you 16777214 addresses.
And this continues the misunderstanding that the OP has that available address block size depends on the address. Yes I know the 3 ranges have different amounts of addresses available. What he has to learn is how to subnet, not follow obsolete info. I have been working with IP since early 1995, when I took some courses through Humber College. Even back then, address classes were obsolete. And back then, sitting in the class, I realized 32 bits was nowhere near enough, which is why I have been advocating for IPv6, ever since I first read about it, in the April 1995 issue of Byte magazine.
On Sat, Apr 29, 2023 at 8:28 PM James Knott via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:
On 2023-04-29 21:18, Kevin Cozens via talk wrote:
On 2023-04-29 16:04, o1bigtenor via talk wrote:
(My head is swimming with all the explanations on IP routing - - - have spent about 3 hours now looking at various documents - - - - I just can't find a clear answer. The first statement is my present network - - - I'm trying to figure out how to move beyond the access of only 254 devices at one time.
The Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) has assigned several address ranges to be used by private networks.
Address ranges to be use by private networks are: Class A: 10.0.0.0 to 10.255.255.255 Class B: 172.16.0.0 to 172.31.255.255 Class C: 192.168.0.0 to 192.168.255.255
If 0 and 255 should not be used for the last number then the 192 block gives you 254 address, 172.16 gives you 65534, and 10 gives you 16777214 addresses.
And this continues the misunderstanding that the OP has that available address block size depends on the address. Yes I know the 3 ranges have different amounts of addresses available. What he has to learn is how to subnet, not follow obsolete info.
I have been working with IP since early 1995, when I took some courses through Humber College. Even back then, address classes were obsolete. And back then, sitting in the class, I realized 32 bits was nowhere near enough, which is why I have been advocating for IPv6, ever since I first read about it, in the April 1995 issue of Byte magazine.
You seem to have this mastered - - - - then: How do I write more than 254 addresses in ipv4 using only the quad? (You get no / anything - - - - just the 4 quads! The idea is that these are all permanently set - - - not just flitting temporary demands a la Mikkie D's example.) Regards
On 2023-04-30 10:40, o1bigtenor wrote:
You seem to have this mastered - - - - then:
Yep. I also had some courses when I was at IBM, in the late 90s, and also went for my CCNA a few years ago.
How do I write more than 254 addresses in ipv4 using only the quad?
(You get no / anything - - - - just the 4 quads! The idea is that these are all permanently set - - - not just flitting temporary demands a la Mikkie D's example.)
You have fallen into the trap that I've been describing. That sort of thinking has been obsolete for 30 years. Have you seen any equipment that does not allow you to specify the subnet size on IPv4, at least other than consumer level gear? All the "/" does is tell you how long the network and host portions of the address are.
On Sun, Apr 30, 2023 at 9:52 AM James Knott via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:
On 2023-04-30 10:40, o1bigtenor wrote:
You seem to have this mastered - - - - then:
Yep. I also had some courses when I was at IBM, in the late 90s, and also went for my CCNA a few years ago.
How do I write more than 254 addresses in ipv4 using only the quad?
(You get no / anything - - - - just the 4 quads! The idea is that these are all permanently set - - - not just flitting temporary demands a la Mikkie D's example.)
You have fallen into the trap that I've been describing. That sort of thinking has been obsolete for 30 years. Have you seen any equipment that does not allow you to specify the subnet size on IPv4, at least other than consumer level gear? All the "/" does is tell you how long the network and host portions of the address are.
I think the issue here is that we are thinking of the use from 2 different ends. You are thinking solely from the router - - - and then your impassioned responses are likely correct. I just spent over 1/2 hour looking at a number of SoCs (3) and microcontrollers (also 3) and I can't find one where I can give it this 'classless' address you're talking about. I am limited to using the quad - - - unless I am using ipv6. Perhaps - - - - how can I run ipv6 inside (on my lan) and communicate out using ONLY ipv4? (Popcorn ready!) Regards
On 2023-04-30 17:55, o1bigtenor via talk wrote:
I just spent over 1/2 hour looking at a number of SoCs (3) and microcontrollers (also 3) and I can't find one where I can give it this 'classless' address you're talking about.
Is there nowhere to set the subnet mask? Either with / notation or a.b.c.d. If you can set the address, you should be able to do that, one way or the other. For example, a typical network would be a /24. It could be expressed as 10.0.0.0 /24 or 10.0.0.0 255.255.255.0, depending on the equipment.
On Sun, Apr 30, 2023 at 5:21 PM James Knott via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:
On 2023-04-30 17:55, o1bigtenor via talk wrote:
I just spent over 1/2 hour looking at a number of SoCs (3) and microcontrollers (also 3) and I can't find one where I can give it this 'classless' address you're talking about.
Is there nowhere to set the subnet mask? Either with / notation or a.b.c.d. If you can set the address, you should be able to do that, one way or the other.
For example, a typical network would be a /24. It could be expressed as 10.0.0.0 /24 or 10.0.0.0 255.255.255.0, depending on the equipment.
Nope - - - - all I'm allowed is a quad - - - - or ipv6. You likely quite disbelieve me - - - you are welcome to check for yourself. I would be quite happy to be proven wrong! (RaspberryPi 4B PasberryPi Pico w lan 8720 module (I lprefer wired communications - - security) beagleBoneBlack ESP32 microcontroller can't find the other 2 - - - - sorry) Regards
On Sun, Apr 30, 2023 at 05:53:04PM -0500, o1bigtenor via talk wrote:
On Sun, Apr 30, 2023 at 5:21 PM James Knott via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:
On 2023-04-30 17:55, o1bigtenor via talk wrote:
I just spent over 1/2 hour looking at a number of SoCs (3) and microcontrollers (also 3) and I can't find one where I can give it this 'classless' address you're talking about.
Is there nowhere to set the subnet mask? Either with / notation or a.b.c.d. If you can set the address, you should be able to do that, one way or the other.
For example, a typical network would be a /24. It could be expressed as 10.0.0.0 /24 or 10.0.0.0 255.255.255.0, depending on the equipment.
Nope - - - - all I'm allowed is a quad - - - - or ipv6.
You likely quite disbelieve me - - - you are welcome to check for yourself. I would be quite happy to be proven wrong!
(RaspberryPi 4B PasberryPi Pico w lan 8720 module (I lprefer wired communications - - security) beagleBoneBlack ESP32 microcontroller can't find the other 2 - - - - sorry)
For example ESP32 has a netmask setting: https://techtutorialsx.com/2020/04/21/esp32-arduino-set-static-ip-address/ It mentions IPAddress staticIP(192, 168, 1, 150); IPAddress gateway(192, 168, 1, 254); IPAddress subnet(255, 255, 255, 0); IPAddress dns(192, 168, 1, 254); So perfectly simply to change the subnet to (255, 255, 254, 0). DHCP works too of course based on whatever the dhcp server is configured to hand out. For the raspberry pi 4B, they are usually running Raspeberry Pi OS which is Debian based, and for static ip it simply has /etc/network/interfaces: auto eno1 iface eno1 inet static address 192.168.0.2/23 gateway 192.168.0.1 or if using old syntax: auto eno1 iface eno1 inet static address 192.168.0.2 netmask 255.255.254.0 gateway 192.168.0.1 Again you simply set the netmask to 255.255.254.0 or whatever else you need. beaglebone black often also runs a Debian based OS so same thing applies there. Given classless IPv4 was introduced in 1993, there is no way any micro controller doesn't have a netmask setting. They all do. It has been around for 30 years after all. Of course CIDR syntax is much nicer than netmask which is horrible as an interface. /24 = 255.255.255.0 /23 = 255.255.254.0 /22 = 255.255.252.0 /21 = 255.255.248.0 /20 = 255.255.240.0 etc. Pretty ugly to read and a bit annoying to calculate. -- Len Sorensen
On Sun, 30 Apr 2023 at 18:53, o1bigtenor via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:
PasberryPi Pico w lan 8720 module (I lprefer wired communications - - security)
I found this article: https://www.raspberrypi.com/news/how-to-add-ethernet-to-raspberry-pi-pico/ If you follow it, your Pico will obtain an IP address from the router (or other DCHP server) using DHCP. Therefore, for example, if you set your router's DHCP server to assign addresses for 172.16.0.0 with a mask of 255.255.0.0 (or 172.16.0.0/16), it would be able to hand out up to 65534 IPv4 addresses (not including the router itself) in the range of 172.16.0.1 to 172.16.255.254 If you need the Pico to have a fixed IP address, most DHCP servers can be set to assign specific IP addresses based on the device's MAC address. I haven't looked further but it's also very likely that you can configure the ethernet port of the Pico itself to have a static IP address and a mask of any length. -- Scott
On Sun, Apr 30, 2023 at 6:32 PM Scott Allen <mlxxxp@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 30 Apr 2023 at 18:53, o1bigtenor via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:
PasberryPi Pico w lan 8720 module (I lprefer wired communications - - security)
I found this article: https://www.raspberrypi.com/news/how-to-add-ethernet-to-raspberry-pi-pico/
If you follow it, your Pico will obtain an IP address from the router (or other DCHP server) using DHCP. Therefore, for example, if you set your router's DHCP server to assign addresses for 172.16.0.0 with a mask of 255.255.0.0 (or 172.16.0.0/16), it would be able to hand out up to 65534 IPv4 addresses (not including the router itself) in the range of 172.16.0.1 to 172.16.255.254
If you need the Pico to have a fixed IP address, most DHCP servers can be set to assign specific IP addresses based on the device's MAC address.
I haven't looked further but it's also very likely that you can configure the ethernet port of the Pico itself to have a static IP address and a mask of any length.
Also the article that I had read. What you have written is the direction that I've been thinking. Its easy- - its straightforward. I understand its not sexy - - - like using the 192.168.1.1/16 but it will get the job done. My only concern is what I do for when I switch to ipv6 (its in the cards likely inside of 18 to 24 months) - - - - the information that I've found on ipv6 so far is all for small scale networks - - - under 30 or so devices - - - - maybe I'll have to start looking for information on ipv6 and 500 to 2000 devices. Oh well - - - - thanks to one and all for the information. Hopefully was at least somewhat interesting - - - - grin. Regards
On Sun, Apr 30, 2023 at 09:40:00AM -0500, o1bigtenor via talk wrote:
You seem to have this mastered - - - - then:
How do I write more than 254 addresses in ipv4 using only the quad?
(You get no / anything - - - - just the 4 quads! The idea is that these are all permanently set - - - not just flitting temporary demands a la Mikkie D's example.)
They are not permanent and as said, haven't been fixed block sizes for like 3 decades. Nothing wrong with 192.168.0.1 to 192.168.1.254 being one network. 192.168.0.255 and 192.168.1.0 are both valid addresses in 192.168.0.0/23 subnet. In 192.168.0.0/24 192.168.0.255 would obviously not be a valid address. Every device that allows an IP to be entered also has either a netmask (which you can set to 255.255.254.0 for /23) or has the /23 notation available. -- Len Sorensen
On Sat, 29 Apr 2023 at 16:04, o1bigtenor via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:
<snip> If I set up a router using the 192.168.1.1 I can access some 254 distinct IP addresses from my router.
If I set up a router using the 176.10.1.1 how many distinct IP addresses can I access?
(I'm thinking some 64k worth but dunno!)
Just how many addresses do you need? If you need double the size of the usual /24 (255.255.255.0) subnet, use the /23 subnet: Router: 192.168.1.1 Subnet: 255.255.254.0 (the equivalent of /23) In this case, your subnet will extend from 192.168.0.1 to 192.168.1.254 (512-2=510 addresses) If you need four times the size of the /24 subnet, use the /22 subnet: Router: 192.168.1.1 Subnet: 255.255.252.0 (= /22) Your subnet: 192.168.0.1 to 192.168.3.254 (1024-2=1022 addresses) Your router does not have to have its address end in .1, in fact it can have any address in your subnet. If you insist on your router having the very first IP address in your subnet, set it to 192.168.0.1 in the two examples above. Next time you connect to some public WiFi network, execute "ifconfig" to see your IP address and your subnet. In my observations, airports WiFi networks typically use the /22 subnets (up to 1022 addresses). Most restaurants, McDonalds included, use /24 subnets, but I have seen ones that use /23. I have not yet seen a public Wifi network that uses a /21 subnet providing up to 2046 addresses. To see where the address space in your IP subnet will begin and where it will end, you can use this online IP subnet calculator: https://www.calculator.net/ip-subnet-calculator.html
On Sun, Apr 30, 2023 at 12:18:26AM -0400, Val Kulkov via talk wrote:
Next time you connect to some public WiFi network, execute "ifconfig" to see your IP address and your subnet. In my observations, airports WiFi networks typically use the /22 subnets (up to 1022 addresses). Most restaurants, McDonalds included, use /24 subnets, but I have seen ones that use /23. I have not yet seen a public Wifi network that uses a /21 subnet providing up to 2046 addresses.
I have seen /16 subnets on wifi networks. I think some are even bigger than that. Some of the stadium setups are insane. 2000 APs is not unusual in a single network. If you have 50000 people and most of them have a cell phone and decide to connect to the network, you get a lot of devices. No idea why people go to events with expensive tickets and then spend so much time on social media while there. -- Len Sorensen
participants (9)
-
Alex Kink -
D. Hugh Redelmeier -
Dhaval Giani -
James Knott -
Kevin Cozens -
Lennart Sorensen -
o1bigtenor -
Scott Allen -
Val Kulkov