2

1) Subnetting and Supernetting can both be done for private and public IP addresses?

2) Classful addresses weren't successful because of IP wasting, and that is why the 'network mask' was invented, correct?

My book clearly says the following : "Beyond the waste and exhaustion of the available addresses, ... (more problems). To overcome such problems, it is done systematic and specialized use of the network mask."

So I thought, that thanks to the mask we no longer need classes

3) Computers in classful networks all had public IP addresses, which led to IP wasting. The question here is: does this still exist nowadays?


Edit:

Can Public IP addresses be given to computers, not only to routers. If so how can this be done?

4)Last, I want help with the following example:

If an organisation with 1000 computers was given a Class B network, then every computer by standard(!) would have a public IP address. So a lot of these addresses will remain unused and wasted. Thanks to the introduction of the mask, the organisation could be given a subnet of that network with fewer computers.

Is this way how it works?

  • You may be interested in this answer which covers some of what you ask about. – Ron Maupin Jan 23 at 21:48
  • I updated my answer based on your edits. – Ron Trunk Jan 26 at 16:35
3

1)Subnetting and Supernetting can both be done for private and public IP addresses?

Yes. To the computer there is no distinction between public and private. They are all IP addresses.

2)Classful addresses weren't successful because of IP wasting,and that is why the 'network mask' was invented,correct?

Not quite. The network mask defines which part of the address is the network address and which part is the host address.

3)Computers in classful networks all had public IP addresses,which led to IP wasting.The question here is: Does this still exist nowadays?

The private addresses (RFC1918) existed with classful addressing. So, no, not all computers had public addresses. The situation is the same now: public (globally routable) addresses are used on the Internet, but many (most?) internal networks have private address configured internally and use address translation when communicating over the Internet.

Additional Answers:

Can Public IP addresses be given to computers, not only to routers. If so how can this be done?

Any host, router or computer, can be given an IP address. Again, there is no real distinction between public and private addresses. Network devices can't tell the difference. It's just by convention that we don't allow private IPs on the Internet.

Thanks to the introduction of the mask, the organisation could be given a subnet of that network with fewer computers.

You seem to be under the misconception that subnet masks were an afterthought, or somehow added later. IP addresses always had subnet masks. They define the network portion of the address, and without it, routing would be impossible.

With classful addressing, organizations were assigned IP block based on the classful mask. So yes, there were a lot of wasted addresses. CIDR simply stopped using the "class" mask and directly specified it instead. That allowed smaller ranges to be assigned, wasting less space.

  • About the second question,i was talking about using the mask in a special way to assign smaller networks .That way was CIDR and VLSM as you have already mentioned.Last,You said that we don't allow private IP addresses on the Internet.But if we did,then wouldn't it be catastrophic?Because many computers on the Internet would have the same IP,resulting in IP collision? – Zach Jan 28 at 5:41
  • You said that we don't allow private IP addresses on the Internet. But if we did, then wouldn't it be catastrophic? Obviously. My point is that there is no distinction to the router between a public IP and a private IP. They are routed exactly the same. – Ron Trunk Jan 28 at 13:47
2

1)Subnetting and Supernetting can both be done for private and public IP addresses?

Yes. There is no IP distinction between private or public IP addresses. The private addresses were chosen somewhat arbitrarily, and only by ISP agreement are they blocked from being routed on the public Internet. Other than that, there is no inherent difference.

2)Classful addresses weren't successful because of IP wasting,and that is why the 'network mask' was invented,correct?

Classful addresses are wasteful because only the full class could be routed on the Internet. They could be subnetted inside the entity that owned a classful network. Masks existed before VLSM and CIDR.

3)Computers in classful networks all had public IP addresses,which led to IP wasting.The question here is: Does this still exist nowadays?

I'm not sure I quite understand the question. Network classes no longer exist, but there are entities that had been assigned a classful network and still have the entire block that had been assigned during the time we had classful networks.


I think it is important to understand that you cannot really have an efficient method of assigning IP addresses. There have been studies and math to back that up. That is one of the reasons that IPv6 was designed from the beginning to waste addresses.


Edit:

Can Public IP addresses be given to computers, not only to routers. If so how can this be done?

Yes, by simply assigning public addresses to the hosts. It is very easy to route traffic between public networks, and that is how IP was designed to work. Many (almost all the large) companies have hosts assigned with public addresses.

4)Last, I want help with the following example:

If an organisation with 1000 computers was given a Class B network, then every computer by standard(!) would have a public IP address. So a lot of these addresses will remain unused and wasted. Thanks to the introduction of the mask, the organisation could be given a subnet of that network with fewer computers.

Is this way how it works?

The original premise of IP is that every host have a unique IP address. Because of the limited size of IPv4 addresses, and the fact that IPv4 was never envisioned to be used as it is now, that is simply not possible. This answer explains all of that.

Classes restricted the networks that could be publicly advertise to one of three classes, and that meant an organization needing 1,000 addresses would be assigned a Class B network (65,536) addresses, which the organization could internally subnet, and that wasted over 98% of the addresses in that class. That is also explained in the answer I linked.

VLSM and CIDR removed the class restrictions and allowed an organization to be assigned a smaller number of addresses. The organization needing 1,000 addresses could then ask for a /22 network (1,024 addresses), but probably a /21 or smaller network to allow room for growth. This is also explained in the answer I linked.

Unfortunately, the resource of "raw" IPv4 addresses (from IANA and the RIRs) to be assigned is exhausted, and an organization needing public IPv4 addresses must now buy them on the open market from companies that have extra for increasing prices. IPv6 addresses are plentiful, and IPv6 restores the original IP paradigm of every host having a unique IP address with end-to-end connectivity. This is also explained in the answer I linked.

Your Answer

By clicking "Post Your Answer", you acknowledge that you have read our updated terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy, and that your continued use of the website is subject to these policies.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.