1

https://community.spiceworks.com/questions/111/explanation

All of the answers to this question are technically correct and I feel the question should be removed.

7 Spice ups
2

I’d agree. If anything given the possibilities, the question might have been better worded along the lines of “which address range would be considered the least likely appropriate”. I think whoever made the question might have accidentally sub-netted the 192 address 16 spaces instead of 24.

2 Spice ups
3

Agreed that there’s no wrong answer. I could see an argument that 192.168.x.x makes more sense than the others with the stated givens (especially if we assume old school classful networking), but that’s purely a personal preference and any of the choices would technically work. Short of intentionally breaking three of the subnets offered (which will alter the question a great deal), I’d agree with the recommendation to remove the question.

1 Spice up
4

A very valid point, IMHO. The wording of the question does not follow with the explanation given.

At the very least, the question should be re-worded.

I put the question in moderation for review.

1 Spice up
5

I answered 10. and was classed as the wrong answer which is why I have raised it.

Cheers guys, lets see what the Spiceworks people say

6

I’d agree - all 4 answers would work, and although I’m guessing 192.168,x,x is the stated correct answer, there is nothing which could be considered “wrong” about using the others.

Question should be drastically reworded, or more likely removed.

1 Spice up
7

All four answers will work. Which one you choose will depend entirely on other factors.

1 Spice up
8

You are correct, all are correct answers. The 192.168.x.x answer would be the “most” correct if we are going with classful networking. But classful networking is dead, some just won’t let it (it being the concepts behind it) go.