Re: Multi-Networking in Linux - Multiple Subnets

On 31/07/2026 14:06, Marc Haber wrote:
> "Carlos E. R." <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On 2026-07-30 13:59, Robert Heller wrote:
>>> The 192.168.*.0 sub-nets are for class Class C Private
>>> sub-nets.
>>
>> LOL. ChatGPT just said to me:
>>
>> The IPv4 address ranges reserved for private local networks (defined in RFC 1918) are:
>>
>> | Private range                     | CIDR notation    | Number of addresses | Common use                                      |
>> | --------------------------------- | ---------------- | ------------------: | ----------------------------------------------- |
>> | **10.0.0.0 – 10.255.255.255**     | `10.0.0.0/8`     |          16,777,216 | Large enterprise networks, cloud infrastructure |
>> | **172.16.0.0 – 172.31.255.255**   | `172.16.0.0/12`  |           1,048,576 | Medium to large private networks                |
>> | **192.168.0.0 – 192.168.255.255** | `192.168.0.0/16` |              65,536 | Home routers and small office networks          |
>>
>> It gives no link for this information, except citing RFC 1918
> 
> That is not a contradiction. There is no obligation to waste IP
> addresses, you can always choose a longer prefix. And it is actually a
> smart idea to do so.
> 
> The fact that the net is full of incorrect, obsolete, and misleading
> terminology is a reason for "AI" to ingest that and of course to
> regurgitate it.
> 
That is simply RFC1918.

Make up your mind

> Greetings
> Marc

-- 
"And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch".

Gospel of St. Mathew 15:14