I store many IP-Addresses in a database. Is there any common notation for a group of IP-Addresses and subnet.
Currently I dither between these notations:
*.*.*.160/29
?.?.?.160/29
...160/29
x.x.x.160/29
0.0.0.160/29
Network Engineering Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for network engineers. It only takes a minute to sign up.
Sign up to join this communityI store many IP-Addresses in a database. Is there any common notation for a group of IP-Addresses and subnet.
Currently I dither between these notations:
*.*.*.160/29
?.?.?.160/29
...160/29
x.x.x.160/29
0.0.0.160/29
You should not need the subnet mask if you are storing endpoint IP addresses.
Networks are said to be super netted when grouped together. So you would not x out the left (network) side of the address, you would x out the right side, i.e., 10.12.x.x/24. Each x represents 8 bits of address space.
IPv4 endpoints are configured with a subnet mask that specifies how many of its 32 address bits represents network addressing vs host numbering. Each network has a network address (all 0's) and a broadcast address (all 1's).
The network address is synonymous to the subnet, e.g., the 10.1 network (10.1.0.0/16).
I know of no standard. In documentation, when possible, I would replace by letters:
x.y.z.160/29
followed by something like "where x.y.z is the network of each branch office".
In ACLs I would possibly use a netmask with holes, such as 0.0.0.160 netmask 0.0.0.248, but I would not expect it to be understood even by an "expert" firewall administrator, and I'm not sure that Cisco ACLs still support this.
I think your other possibilities are harder to understand.
If your network architecture should be explained to non-experts and it cannot be represented in x.y.z.160/29 notation, I submit that it is a problem more in the architecture than in the possibilities of the standardized nomenclature.
Zeroes should be the preferred way, consider the default route of 0.0.0.0/0 which matches every single subnet.
In all my days I've never seen anyone want to do this but if you really must have a technically correct description you need to use a mask, not CIDR notation and for all /29 nets I guess that would be "network 0.0.0.160 mask 0.0.0.248"