Amazing!!! I`m studying for my CCNA with Jeremy IT and he had mentioned about you before. But honestly this time I was randomly browsing the TH-cam trying to find a good explanation on Wildcard Mask matches and you were the only one going straight to the point, in a detailed, didactic and clear explanation. Thanks a lot, subscribed and liked!!!
Never heard of ACLs, and this is the 2nd playlist I've watched from you, starting with the Fundamentals. Guess I'm not finished scouring through your videos yet! Thanks for this free content!
I saw your comment saying this was rare. I'm in a high school networking class and this was in our book about ACL (CISCO). It described this concept as range and made perfect sense. Instead of explicitly sitting for each Network, do one for a range of networks. Your video helped me visualize it more, thank you!
love this video which also clearly and essentially explained the difference between subnet mask and wildcard mask which ever puzzled me. Truly fantastique tutorial!
I discovered during CISCO classes that to represent a range of networks (as you did with the discontinuous mask), I typically could just use subtraction. As in the example in the video, the 32 network bits subtracted from the 40 network bits is 8, and the 96 network bits subtracted from 99 is 3. Ala, 0.3.8.255. It seemed to always provide the correct range. I tended to think of it as a 'relative' or 'relational' mask. Did I just get lucky? Is there a reason to not do it that way? Was the binary layout for more explicit illustration? Thanks for your excellent, quality, videos.
Yes, wildcard masks to facilitate an easier subtraction method to calculate Network Ranges. The potential tricky part is understanding where you are starting and ending. It's the same subtraction/addition method I use with the Group Size in my Subnetting series.
hey, I have a question, what would travel faster from an IP address to IP address lets say for example 2 phones, in terms of travel speed would sending a text be faster than voice like if a packet contains text data and a packet contains voice data, which packet would travel faster, I'd assume the text packet because it's probably lighter since voice data is more complex and that makes it heavier, right?
Everything is converted to 1s and 0s, and therefore ends up "weighing" the same. I put weighing in quotes, because in the end it's just an electrical signal, and that doesn't actually have a weight.
The speed in which a 1 or 0 gets through a wire doesn't change. It's essentially the speed of light. But most communications travel through routers and other network devices which introduce their own processing time to move the packet along. This is what "latency" is actually measuring. What you might be conflating is "bandwidth", which is how many bits can be sent/processed in a particular second. Remember, a short voice message can be less bits than a long text message. So, simply saying in absolute that voice will take longer isn't entirely accurate. In the end, it's all just a set of 1s and 0s. I talk about latency (vs bandwidth) in this article: www.practicalnetworking.net/stand-alone/converged-network/
Nope, that would be a third octet of 0000 0111. Our mask was 0000 1000. Which translates to 8 in the third octet. 0.0.7.255 isn't actually a discontiguous wildcard mask, it's simply a regular wildcard mask that correlates to a /21 CIDR or 255.255.240.0 Subnet Mask. =)
@@PracticalNetworking I just want to be sure I am understanding this correctly. If you had 10.96.32.0 0.0.7.255 it would amount to saying permit all addresses beginning FROM 10.96.32.0 and UP TO 10.96.39.255. That is to say, .32, .33, .34, ....39. The wildcard mask 0.0.7.255 would NOT include subnet 10.96.40.x. Is this correct? Whereas, if you had 10.96.32.0 0.0.9.255 it would amount to saying: permit ONLY the following subnets and respective .0-.255 addresses: 10.96.32.x, 10.96.33.x, 10.96.40.x, and 10.96.41.x. Is this correct?
Amazing!!!
I`m studying for my CCNA with Jeremy IT and he had mentioned about you before.
But honestly this time I was randomly browsing the TH-cam trying to find a good explanation on Wildcard Mask matches and you were the only one going straight to the point, in a detailed, didactic and clear explanation.
Thanks a lot, subscribed and liked!!!
Thank you for your support, Fernando. Glad you enjoyed this video =)
Brilliant Ed! - 3 years on and this vid is still a gem!
Never heard of ACLs, and this is the 2nd playlist I've watched from you, starting with the Fundamentals.
Guess I'm not finished scouring through your videos yet! Thanks for this free content!
The way you explain things is awesome. I really appreciate your work on these videos. Subscribed 👍
I saw your comment saying this was rare. I'm in a high school networking class and this was in our book about ACL (CISCO). It described this concept as range and made perfect sense. Instead of explicitly sitting for each Network, do one for a range of networks. Your video helped me visualize it more, thank you!
Excellent, I'm glad this is helping you understand. =). Feel free to share it with your class mates =)
Greatly delivered…!!!
Thanks for sharing the facts about its use.
Thank you. Glad you enjoyed it
love this video which also clearly and essentially explained the difference between subnet mask and wildcard mask which ever puzzled me. Truly fantastique tutorial!
Thank you, John =) Glad you enjoyed it!
absolutely amazing, you are a great teacher, thank you for these years ive learned from you
Awesome video !!! excellent explanation.Thank you so much for sharing.
Glad you enjoyed it!
Brother, the explanation was so clean. filled the knowledge gap I had. Keep going
Thank you for the kind words, Karthik. Cheers =)
Thank you very much for your video. It helps me lot in ccna
Glad you help! Good luck with the CCNA!
You are amazing man for real . Really amazing
!!!! I wish you put the last part at the beginning!!! I wouldn't have stressed so much trying to understand that concept!!!!!!!
No need to stress =). You're in good hands.
I agree, you're Wright, he's in the Good hand, and we're all, Thank's Ad
you blew my mind
=)
Man You Are Amazing
Beautiful and thanks
I'm lost since we flipped the bit of the third octet in wildcard
Reach out to me on Discord, we can talk through it: pracnet.net/discord
Amazing video!!!
Thank you, Enrique. =)
Thanks. This is good.
Hi Azza, Glad you like this too =)
Thank you very much🙏🙏🙏
I discovered during CISCO classes that to represent a range of networks (as you did with the discontinuous mask), I typically could just use subtraction. As in the example in the video, the 32 network bits subtracted from the 40 network bits is 8, and the 96 network bits subtracted from 99 is 3. Ala, 0.3.8.255. It seemed to always provide the correct range. I tended to think of it as a 'relative' or 'relational' mask. Did I just get lucky? Is there a reason to not do it that way? Was the binary layout for more explicit illustration? Thanks for your excellent, quality, videos.
Yes, wildcard masks to facilitate an easier subtraction method to calculate Network Ranges. The potential tricky part is understanding where you are starting and ending. It's the same subtraction/addition method I use with the Group Size in my Subnetting series.
what is this area 0 you show at the end of the video? How would this be written in the ACL?
Very nice! I guess there's a reason they don't teach that side of wildcard masks, cool nonetheless.
Yeap. It's something that was used way back in the day (80's~), but has sort of fallen out of favor.
Could you please update about VPN?
It's on my list =). Thanks Jalal.
hey, I have a question, what would travel faster from an IP address to IP address lets say for example 2 phones, in terms of travel speed would sending a text be faster than voice like if a packet contains text data and a packet contains voice data, which packet would travel faster, I'd assume the text packet because it's probably lighter since voice data is more complex and that makes it heavier, right?
Everything is converted to 1s and 0s, and therefore ends up "weighing" the same. I put weighing in quotes, because in the end it's just an electrical signal, and that doesn't actually have a weight.
@@PracticalNetworking but wouldn't the fact that there are more 1s and 0s make it require more time?
The speed in which a 1 or 0 gets through a wire doesn't change. It's essentially the speed of light.
But most communications travel through routers and other network devices which introduce their own processing time to move the packet along. This is what "latency" is actually measuring.
What you might be conflating is "bandwidth", which is how many bits can be sent/processed in a particular second.
Remember, a short voice message can be less bits than a long text message. So, simply saying in absolute that voice will take longer isn't entirely accurate. In the end, it's all just a set of 1s and 0s.
I talk about latency (vs bandwidth) in this article:
www.practicalnetworking.net/stand-alone/converged-network/
@@PracticalNetworking ok ok thanks very much, I feel like you make a good teacher btw.
shouldn't that mask be 0.0.7.255 and 0.3.7.255
Nope, that would be a third octet of 0000 0111. Our mask was 0000 1000. Which translates to 8 in the third octet.
0.0.7.255 isn't actually a discontiguous wildcard mask, it's simply a regular wildcard mask that correlates to a /21 CIDR or 255.255.240.0 Subnet Mask.
=)
@@PracticalNetworking I just want to be sure I am understanding this correctly. If you had 10.96.32.0 0.0.7.255 it would amount to saying permit all addresses beginning FROM 10.96.32.0 and UP TO 10.96.39.255. That is to say, .32, .33, .34, ....39. The wildcard mask 0.0.7.255 would NOT include subnet 10.96.40.x. Is this correct?
Whereas, if you had 10.96.32.0 0.0.9.255 it would amount to saying: permit ONLY the following subnets and respective .0-.255 addresses: 10.96.32.x, 10.96.33.x, 10.96.40.x, and 10.96.41.x. Is this correct?