Replying to a post on discuss.tchncs.de
The problem looks to be your subnet specification. /24 is 256 addresses. So for your 192.168.0.10/24 export, you’re exposing it to 0.10 and the following 255 IPs.
The closest thing to what you want to achieve would be a /29, which would expose it to the given IP and the following 7 IPs.
Replying to @gooeyglob@lemmy.world
That can’t be right. For exposing it to a whole subnet, it would have to be 192.168.0.0/24, wouldn’t it?
Edit: Completely misread things, I thought you had 192.168.10.0 and 192.168.20.0. Yes it would be the whole subnet for a /24, if you wanted less you’d go higher as mentioned.
192.168.0.0/29 would include 192.168.0.1-192.168.0.7.
/28 would get you up to 192.168.0.15.
No, /24 is just 256 IPs.
192.168.0.0/24 = 192.168.0.0 mask 255.255.255.0, or 192.168.0.1-192.168.0.254.
If you want 192.168.0.0 through, say, 192.168.7.254, you need to cover 2k ip’s, which is a /21. The mask would be 255.255.248.0.
A /24 would only be the last octet.
Replying to @joulethief@discuss.tchncs.de
No, if you mean 192.168.0.0 - 192.168.255.255, that is a /16 192.168.0.0 - 192.168.0.255 is a /24 192.168.0.0 - 192.168.0.7 is a /29
I was a little glib in my initial response. You really don’t want to start your definition in the middle of a subnet.
I would set it up so your first group of /29 would be 192.168.0.0 - 192.168.0.7
Second would be 192.168.0.8 - 192.168.0.15 (192.168.0.8/29)
Third would be 192.168.0.16 - 192.168.0.23 (192.168.0.16/29)
And so on.