3 ms·
Up until 4 years ago, I used to always allocate addresses specifically on bit boundaries. I did this mainly for one reason - aligning the bytes and trying not t
by HighPlainsDrftr 8y ago
Up until 4 years ago, I used to always allocate addresses specifically on bit boundaries. I did this mainly for one reason - aligning the bytes and trying not to waste CPU cycles.
For example, in a /24 network:
0-15 - network equipment
16-31 - some special gear
32-63 - mail servers or something like that
64-127 - split it up and align more things
128-191... you get the point.
...
The ultimate goal was to hit everything on a bit boundary so the CPU wouldn't work so hard
These days, CPU power is so prominent, it doesn't matter. DHCP is probably the way to go.
IPv6 is here. We have the opportunity to really make CPU's fast again with IPv6!
- anyfoo 8y agoWhat's a "bit boundary" in this context? And how does you subclassing scheme prevent wasted CPU cycles. at all?