On 2007-11-12, Legend <rahul986@gmail.com> wrote: > If I have a list of IP addresses, then how can I say that a group of > them belongs to a particular router and the rest to another? Or is it > just possible to get the general representation schema for that set of > IPs? For example, if I have something like: > > 192.168.0.2 > 192.168.0.3 > 192.168.0.4 > 192.168.0.5 > > I want to say that this belongs to 192.168.0.x. But I was in a doubt > if this would actually work. Any suggestions please? > Perhaps the term you are looking for is 'netmask'?

On Mon, 12 Nov 2007, in the Usenet newsgroup comp.os.linux.networking, in article <1194914639.963793.189930@q5g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, David Schwartz wrote: On Nov 12, 3:09 pm, ibupro...@painkiller.example.tld (Moe Trin) wrote: >> NOTE: Posting from groups.google.com (or some web-forums) dramatically >> reduces the chance of your post being seen. > >What?! Yup - one of the advantages of using a real news reader in place of some web browser is that virtually all of them include a filtering mechanism called a 'score' or 'kill' file. This functionality allows a user to eliminate time-wasting posts. You need only look at the Usenet newsgroup comp.os.linux.misc to see why people might be filtering out posts from google. Despite an abundance of complaints to abuse@google.com, this abuse continues, answered only by an auto-reply boiler-plate response from the ignore.bot at google. The result is people filtering google posts. Not every person is doing so, but a number of those who are inclined to be helpful answering posts do. >> Find a real news server. > >Believe it or not, groups.google.com is a real, honest-to-goodness >news server. No - it is a website used for searching archived websites. It happens to include a number of Usenet groups among other groups of related sites, and you can submit articles that get forwarded to some Usenet groups, but it certainly does not have an NNTP server listening on port 119/tcp. Google is a data mining service matching posted questions with advertisers. I have better things to do with my time and bandwidth. >> You are posting from comcast.net, and they have a very good server. > >And I bet it probably has a web interface just like groups.google.com. news.comcast.net is actually one of the *.isp.giganews.com servers, but I've never bothered to try connecting with a browser. They lack so much capability that has been built into news clients over the roughly twenty-six years that Usenet has existed (about ten years before CERN invented the web server, and UIUC brought out 'mosaic'). You can probably drive nails, and cut wood with a common screwdriver, but I'd rather use a more appropriate tool that is designed for the job. Old guy

On Tue, 13 Nov 2007, in the Usenet newsgroup comp.os.linux.networking, in article <1195007693.736780.34840@s15g2000prm.googlegroups.com>, David Schwartz wrote: NOTE: Posting from groups.google.com (or some web-forums) dramatically reduces the chance of your post being seen. Find a real news server. >(Moe Trin) wrote: >> No - it is a website used for searching archived websites. > >Umm, huh? Perhaps you meant archived articles. While this is one of >the things you can do on groups.google.com, it is also a real news >server. You might want to look at RFC0977, RFC1036 and RFC2822. >Many have local groups as well as a subset of Usenet groups. In fact, >the concept "all Usenet groups" isn't even well-defined. Boy, you are missing a lot of concepts. Try figuring out how to locate stuff posted to the newsgroups news.announce.newgroups, news.groups, or news.lists.misc. On the 15th of each month there is a posting with the subject "List of Big Eight Newsgroups". As of the last posting, it listed just 2282 groups, though there have been a half dozen more created since mid-October. Just eight hierarchies. Everything else, and the server I'm using here has nearly 109000 in 4288 hierarchies from "0" (14 groups) to "zzz" (one group) - is carried at the whim of the local news administrator. >> but it certainly does not have an NNTP server listening on >> port 119/tcp. > >So what? It's not the protocol that makes a news server a news server >but the functionality. Is that like webmasters who test their pages in IE, and if they don't crash the browser, they must be OK? I suppose they can't read RFCs such as RFC2616. As I don't have windoze, they don't get my business either. Actually, if you read those RFCs above, you see that google's handling of news articles doesn't even comply with RFC0822/2822. >> Google is a data mining service matching posted questions with >> advertisers. I have better things to do with my time and bandwidth. > >If you use a commercial ISP, you could probably describe it in >precisely the same terms with precisely the same amount of meaning -- >none. > >Google is supported by advertising. So what? None of the four ISPs I use (one broadband and three dialin) force feed advertisements. None of the three news servers I have access to force feed advertisements. Look at your display and see how many ads are currently displayed. Here, none. >> You can probably drive nails, and cut wood with a common screwdriver, >> but I'd rather use a more appropriate tool that is designed for the >> job. > >You can do almost anything very well with a web browser. Then why does the average "popular" Linux distribution include so many tools besides the browser? Just looking at the Fedora Project: 3253669888 Mar 15 2007 FC-5-i386-DVD.iso 3525195776 Oct 18 2007 FC-6-i386-DVD.iso 2900602880 May 27 14:42 FC-7-i386-DVD.iso 3424749568 Nov 02 15:05 Fedora-8-i386-DVD.iso That must be one hell of a large browser with a lot of plugins. >In any event, none of that is a reason not to use google's news >service. The closest to a legitimate reason you've given is that so >many people use google, there's a good chance there's someone who uses >google who has pissed any given person off. However, if they lump you >in that boat, that's there loss. You keep thinking that. In my case (and others like me), the reason I killfile posts from google (at the moment, I'm only doing so in 6 of the 85 groups I try to scan every day) is continuing abuse. Above, I mentioned the 'List of Big Eight Newsgroups', and in that post, the description of comp.os.linux.misc is given as comp.os.linux.misc Linux-specific topics not covered by other groups. I don't think sports shoes, cigarette sales, or how to make thousands of unspecified dollars on-line - I see there are also p*n*s enlargement pills being advertised there as well - articles are quite Linux specific. You might notice that this newsgroup doesn't have those articles at the moment. As soon as it does, I'll drop google here too. Old guy