prefix vs netmask
-
- Posts: 4
- Joined: 2014/03/06 16:45:58
prefix vs netmask
Hi all,
We have a lot of servers running CentOS and in CentOS 6.4 there is a network setting that changed giving our software problem.
I would like to have information on why when you install CentOS (6.4 in my case) and configure the network setting from the GUI, the NETMASK setting is not included any more in the ifcfg-eth0.
Instead a PREFIX setting is seen.
I would also like to have the implication of having both settings if they don't match.
Thanks,
Eric
We have a lot of servers running CentOS and in CentOS 6.4 there is a network setting that changed giving our software problem.
I would like to have information on why when you install CentOS (6.4 in my case) and configure the network setting from the GUI, the NETMASK setting is not included any more in the ifcfg-eth0.
Instead a PREFIX setting is seen.
I would also like to have the implication of having both settings if they don't match.
Thanks,
Eric
-
- Posts: 10642
- Joined: 2005/08/05 15:19:54
- Location: Northern Illinois, USA
Re: prefix vs netmask
I suggest you not use the NetworkManager service but use the network sevice instead.
system-config-network does have a netmask field.
Please read the FAQ http://wiki.centos.org/FAQ/CentOS6
system-config-network does have a netmask field.
Please read the FAQ http://wiki.centos.org/FAQ/CentOS6
-
- Posts: 4
- Joined: 2014/03/06 16:45:58
Re: prefix vs netmask
Thanks Gerald for your reply.
Actually, we are using the CentOS (basic server) network configurator of the installer GUI to set up the network, like most probably our users will probably do. (we will need to change that...)
I was just wondering why the NETMASK setting was change to PREFIX, to understand the reasons behind this change.
Also, If both NETMASK and PREFIX are included in the ifcfg-eth0 file, which one has priority for the OS ?
From what I'm seeing the PREFIX will have priority, if this is true, does this mean that the NETMASK is not used at all by the CentOS any more ?
Rgds,
Eric
Actually, we are using the CentOS (basic server) network configurator of the installer GUI to set up the network, like most probably our users will probably do. (we will need to change that...)
I was just wondering why the NETMASK setting was change to PREFIX, to understand the reasons behind this change.
Also, If both NETMASK and PREFIX are included in the ifcfg-eth0 file, which one has priority for the OS ?
From what I'm seeing the PREFIX will have priority, if this is true, does this mean that the NETMASK is not used at all by the CentOS any more ?
Rgds,
Eric
- Super Jamie
- Posts: 310
- Joined: 2014/01/10 23:44:51
Re: prefix vs netmask
You can use either PREFIX or NETMASK, but you only need to use one.
NETMASK=255.255.255.0 and PREFIX=24 mean the same thing.
You can see all the valid parameters in the network config files with less $(locate sysconfig.txt)
NETMASK=255.255.255.0 and PREFIX=24 mean the same thing.
You can see all the valid parameters in the network config files with less $(locate sysconfig.txt)
-
- Posts: 4
- Joined: 2014/03/06 16:45:58
Re: prefix vs netmask
Hi Jamie,
Thanks for the command less $(locate sysconfig.txt). I didn't know about this file.
I knew that 255.255.255.0 and prefix 24 was the same thing.
Its only that our software was looking at the netmask setting and now we will need to change it, to look at the netmask & the prefix, in case a user makes a modification manually of the network config file.
It is not a big deal, but I was wondering what was the advantage of using the prefix instead of the netmask or why it was changed.
Rgds,
Eric
Thanks for the command less $(locate sysconfig.txt). I didn't know about this file.
I knew that 255.255.255.0 and prefix 24 was the same thing.
Its only that our software was looking at the netmask setting and now we will need to change it, to look at the netmask & the prefix, in case a user makes a modification manually of the network config file.
It is not a big deal, but I was wondering what was the advantage of using the prefix instead of the netmask or why it was changed.
Rgds,
Eric
-
- Posts: 10642
- Joined: 2005/08/05 15:19:54
- Location: Northern Illinois, USA
Re: prefix vs netmask
Instead of reading the config files you could perhaps check the output of 'ifconfig eth0' or 'ip address show eth0'.
- Super Jamie
- Posts: 310
- Joined: 2014/01/10 23:44:51
Re: prefix vs netmask
PREFIX was added, you can still use NETMASK if you wish to.erixstrong wrote:It is not a big deal, but I was wondering what was the advantage of using the prefix instead of the netmask or why it was changed.
I'm not one of the initscript developers, but I suspect the option to use CIDR prefix was added simply because it's easier to work with a small number like "18" or "24" or "28" than mess around with long subnet masks.
If you are concerned about your admins editing a file in the wrong way, then educate them! The options are all documented in sysconfig.txt and IIRC the upstream vendor's documentation has some bits too. Train your admins to use the config files properly, document your organization's config standard, and there should (theoretically) never be a problem with someone confused by the ifcfg files
-
- Posts: 4
- Joined: 2014/03/06 16:45:58
Re: prefix vs netmask
Thank you Super Jamie and all for your answers.