« first day (3765 days earlier)      last day (58 days later) » 

2:08 AM
 
 
2 hours later…
4:19 AM
Why isn't a subnet mask needed when routing a packet over the internet? Is it because once it reaches the destination network, then a subnet mask is applied to determine the subnetwork?
I red the answers here but frankly none of them seem to answer the question superuser.com/questions/1256044/…
Is it correct that a packet doesn't contain it's subnet mask?
Like who actually specifies the subnet mask, is it the computer sending the packet or the router?
 
 
1 hour later…
5:47 AM
@northerner Who said a subnet mask isn't needed when routing a packet over the internet?
 
@barlop I don't specify one when I ping 8.8.8.8
 
Well, that doesn't mean your computer didn't use one
It might test an IP to see if it's on the local network for example
i'm not sure if it would for that one.
it probably would..
it'd do a test to see whether or not you are pinging a local IP
and that test would probably involve a subnet mask
yeah it would.
By the way, if you were to ping 192.168.123.133 so any IP
you didn't specify a subnet mask there did you
 
But an Ethernet frame doesn't contain a section for a subnet mask.
 
hang on.. So you didn't specify a subnet mask, regardless of whether the IP was to the internet or not. see my ping example
Routers have configurations for subnet masks
Packet would be more accurate than ethernet frame in what you just said.
 
So routers are the ones that know the subnet mask? I wasn't really sure who knew it
 
5:53 AM
and indeed a packet doesn't have a subnet mask in it.
An ethernet frame doesn't have anything to do with IP addresses even.
packet is a better term in that it can be used generally to refer to the whole thing. And still no subnet mask there.
Your computer also specifies a subnet mask too
 
ok so it's handled by OS but not the application?
 
OSs are everywhere. An application could handle a subnet mask too
even a router has an OS
Anybody that wants to check whether an IP is on a particular network.
would use a subnet mask
 
My point being if I knew someone's IP address that would be enough to contact them. How is that possible because don't we need the subnet mask to know which subnet they are on?
 
well, all your computer needs to know is , is it local or not. If it's not then send it out.
A home router just needs to know, is it for local, or is it for the Internet
 
OK that makes sense
 
5:57 AM
Each router needs to know about the subnets directly connected to it.
just going to go to the toilet 1min
btw there is a good book by wendel odom called networking first steps.
Where/How can I download this update for Windows 7? KB4457144
 
ah thanks! I went there before but didn't see the download button before!
 
 
11 hours later…
5:03 PM
With regard to subnets. I tend to compare it to classic paper mail.

You need to know how to get to the mailbox ont he street. Either is is local or elsewhere. And it it is elsewhere you need to know where to send it.

So subnet (is local).
Nope. Then go out of the door (default gateway).

That gateway needs the subnet info for the next path.
 
 
4 hours later…
8:42 PM
Anyone up for some jazz music?
I did not expect Jazz on bagpipes
 
9:53 PM
@Hennes Jazzpipes, you say?
Oh that clip
I understand she's quite the talented multi-instrumentalist
clip was from NY a few years back?
 
First time I saw it
tons of stuff out there I never heard of.
 
I only saw it recently too
every day can be one of those XKCD discovery days
 
Heh.
Though some day there will be too many xkcd numbers to remember
 
Fortunately there's always the wiki :D
I always wonder if anyone's tried browsing his site in a browser conforming to his strange, conflicting recommendations
> xkcd.com is best viewed with Netscape Navigator 4.0 or below on a Pentium 3±1 emulated in Javascript on an Apple IIGS at a screen resolution of 1024x1. Please enable your ad blockers, disable high-heat drying, and remove your device from Airplane Mode and set it to Boat Mode. For security reasons, please leave caps lock on while browsing.
 
10:19 PM
lol
 
10:37 PM
grin. I did not notice that.
 
10:59 PM
@bertieb That's actually been around for a long time...
 

« first day (3765 days earlier)      last day (58 days later) »