Hubbry Logo
Classless Inter-Domain RoutingClassless Inter-Domain RoutingMain
Open search
Classless Inter-Domain Routing
Community hub
Classless Inter-Domain Routing
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Classless Inter-Domain Routing
Classless Inter-Domain Routing
from Wikipedia

Classless Inter-Domain Routing (CIDR /ˈsdər, ˈsɪ-/) is a method for allocating IP addresses for IP routing. The Internet Engineering Task Force introduced CIDR in 1993 to replace the previous classful network addressing architecture on the Internet. Its goal was to slow the growth of routing tables on routers across the Internet, and to help slow the rapid exhaustion of IPv4 addresses.[1][2]

IP addresses are described as consisting of two groups of bits in the address: the most significant bits are the network prefix, which identifies a whole network or subnet, and the least significant set forms the host identifier, which specifies a particular interface of a host on that network. This division is used as the basis of traffic routing between IP networks and for address allocation policies.

Whereas classful network design for IPv4 sized the network prefix as one or more eight-bit groups, resulting in the blocks of Class A, B, or C addresses, under CIDR address space is allocated to Internet service providers and end users on any address-bit boundary. In IPv6, however, the interface identifier has a fixed size of 64 bits by convention, and smaller subnets are never allocated to end users.

CIDR is based on variable-length subnet masking (VLSM), in which network prefixes have variable length (as opposed to the fixed-length prefixing of the previous classful network design). The main benefit of this is that it grants finer control of the sizes of subnets allocated to organizations, hence slowing the exhaustion of IPv4 addresses from allocating larger subnets than needed. CIDR gave rise to a new way of writing IP addresses known as CIDR notation, in which an IP address is followed by a suffix indicating the number of bits of the prefix. Some examples of CIDR notation are the addresses 192.0.2.0/24 for IPv4 and 2001:db8::/32 for IPv6. Blocks of addresses having contiguous prefixes may be aggregated as supernets, reducing the number of entries in the global routing table.

Background

[edit]

Each IP address consists of a network prefix followed by a host identifier. In the classful network architecture of IPv4, the three most significant bits of the 32-bit IP address defined the size of the network prefix for unicast networking, and determined the network class A, B, or C.[3]

Class Most-significant bits Network prefix length
(bits)
Host identifier length
(bits)
Address range
A 0 8 24 0.0.0.0–127.255.255.255
B 10 16 16 128.0.0.0–191.255.255.255
C 110 24 8 192.0.0.0–223.255.255.255
D(multicast) 1110 224.0.0.0–239.255.255.255
E(reserved) 1111 240.0.0.0–255.255.255.255

The advantage of this system is that the network prefix could be determined for any IP address without any further information. The disadvantage is that networks were usually too big or too small for most organizations to use, because only three sizes were available. The smallest allocation and routing block contained 28 = 256 addresses, larger than necessary for personal or department networks, but too small for most enterprises. The next larger block contained 216 = 65536 addresses, too large to be used efficiently even by large organizations. But for network users who needed more than 65536 addresses, the only other size (224) provided far too many, more than 16 million. This led to inefficiencies in address use as well as inefficiencies in routing, because it required a large number of allocated class-C networks with individual route announcements, being geographically dispersed with little opportunity for route aggregation.

Within a decade after the invention of the Domain Name System (DNS), the classful network method was found not scalable.[4] This led to the development of subnetting and CIDR. The formerly meaningful class distinctions based on the most-significant address bits were abandoned and the new system was described as "classless", in contrast to the old system, which became known as "classful". Routing protocols were revised to carry not just IP addresses, but also their subnet masks. Implementing CIDR required every host and router on the Internet to be reprogrammed in small ways—no small feat at a time when the Internet was entering a period of rapid growth. In 1993, the Internet Engineering Task Force published a new set of standards, RFC 1518 and RFC 1519, to define this new principle for allocating IP address blocks and routing IPv4 packets. An updated version, RFC 4632, was published in 2006.[5]

After a period of experimentation with various alternatives, Classless Inter-Domain Routing was based on variable-length subnet masking (VLSM), which allows each network to be divided into subnetworks of various power-of-two sizes, so that each subnetwork can be sized appropriately for local needs. Variable-length subnet masks were mentioned as one alternative in RFC 950.[6] Techniques for grouping addresses for common operations were based on the concept of cluster addressing, first proposed by Carl-Herbert Rokitansky.[7][8]

CIDR notation

[edit]

CIDR notation is a compact representation of an IP address and its associated network mask. The notation was invented by Phil Karn in the 1980s.[9][10] CIDR notation specifies an IP address, a slash character ⟨/⟩, and a decimal number. The decimal number is the count of consecutive leading 1 bits (from left to right) in the network mask. Each 1 bit denotes a bit of the address range which must remain identical to the given IP address. The IP address in CIDR notation is always represented according to the standards for IPv4 or IPv6.

The address may denote a specific interface address (including a host identifier, such as 10.0.0.1/8), or it may be the beginning address of an entire network (using a host identifier of 0, as in 10.0.0.0/8 or its equivalent 10/8). CIDR notation can even be used with no IP address at all, e.g. when referring to a /24 as a generic description of an IPv4 network that has a 24-bit prefix and 8-bit host numbers.

For example:

  • 198.51.100.14/24 represents the IPv4 address 198.51.100.14 and its associated network prefix 198.51.100.0, or equivalently, its subnet mask 255.255.255.0, which has 24 leading 1 bits.
  • the IPv4 block 198.51.100.0/22 represents the 1024 IPv4 addresses from 198.51.100.0 to 198.51.103.255.
  • the IPv6 block 2001:db8::/48 represents the block of IPv6 addresses from 2001:db8:0:0:0:0:0:0 to 2001:db8:0:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff.
  • ::1/128 represents the IPv6 loopback address. Its prefix length is 128 which is the number of bits in the address.

In IPv4, CIDR notation came into wide use only after the implementation of the method, which was documented using dotted-decimal subnet mask specification after the slash, for example, 192.24.12.0/255.255.252.0.[2] Describing the network prefix width as a single number (192.24.12.0/22) was easier for network administrators to conceptualize and to calculate. It became gradually incorporated into later standards documents[11][12] and into network configuration interfaces.

The number of addresses of a network may be calculated as 2address length − prefix length, where "address length" is 128 for IPv6 and 32 for IPv4. For example, in IPv4, the prefix length /29 gives: 232−29 = 23 = 8 addresses.

Subnet masks

[edit]

A subnet mask is a bitmask that encodes the prefix length associated with an IPv4 address or network in quad-dotted notation: 32 bits, starting with a number of ones equal to the prefix length, ending with zeros, and encoded in four-part dotted-decimal format: 255.255.255.0. A subnet mask encodes the same information as a prefix length but predates the advent of CIDR. In CIDR notation, the prefix bits are always contiguous. Subnet masks were allowed by RFC 950[6] to specify non-contiguous bits until RFC 4632[5]: Section 5.1  stated that the mask must consist of only contiguous ones, if any, in the more significant bits and contiguous zeroes, if any, in the less significant bits. Given this constraint, a subnet mask and CIDR notation serve exactly the same function.

CIDR blocks

[edit]

CIDR is principally a bitwise, prefix-based standard for the representation of IP addresses and their routing properties. It facilitates routing by allowing blocks of addresses to be grouped into single routing table entries. These groups, commonly called CIDR blocks, share an initial sequence of bits in the binary representation of their IP addresses. IPv4 CIDR blocks are identified using a syntax similar to that of IPv4 addresses: a dotted-decimal address, followed by a slash, then a number from 0 to 32, i.e., a.b.c.d/n. The dotted-decimal portion is the IPv4 address. The number following the slash is the prefix length, the number of shared initial bits, counting from the most-significant bit of the address. When emphasizing only the size of a network, the address portion of the notation is usually omitted. Thus, a /20 block is a CIDR block with an unspecified 20-bit prefix.

An IP address is part of a CIDR block and is said to match the CIDR prefix if the initial n bits of the address and the CIDR prefix are the same. An IPv4 address is 32 bits so an n-bit CIDR prefix leaves 32−n bits unmatched, meaning that 232−n IPv4 addresses match a given n-bit CIDR prefix. Shorter CIDR prefixes match more addresses, while longer prefixes match fewer. In the case of overlaid CIDR blocks, an address can match multiple CIDR prefixes of different lengths.

CIDR is also used for IPv6 addresses and the syntax semantic is identical. The prefix length can range from 0 to 128, due to the larger number of bits in the address. However, by convention, a subnet on broadcast MAC layer networks always has 64-bit host identifiers.[13] Larger prefixes (/127) are only used on some point-to-point links between routers, for security and policy reasons.[14]

Assignment of CIDR blocks

[edit]

The Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) issues to regional Internet registries (RIRs) large, short-prefix CIDR blocks. However, a /8 (with over sixteen million addresses) is the largest block IANA will allocate. For example, 62.0.0.0/8 is administered by RIPE NCC, the European RIR. The RIRs, each responsible for a single, large, geographic area, such as Europe or North America, subdivide these blocks and allocate subnets to local Internet registries (LIRs). Similar subdividing may be repeated several times at lower levels of delegation. End-user networks receive subnets sized according to their projected short-term need. Networks served by a single ISP are encouraged by IETF recommendations to obtain IP address space directly from their ISP. Networks served by multiple ISPs, on the other hand, may obtain provider-independent address space directly from the appropriate RIR.

For example, in the late 1990s, the IP address 208.130.29.33 (since reassigned) was used by www.freesoft.org. An analysis of this address identified three CIDR prefixes. 208.128.0.0/11, a large CIDR block containing over 2 million addresses, had been assigned by ARIN (the North American RIR) to MCI. Automation Research Systems (ARS), a Virginia VAR, leased an Internet connection from MCI and was assigned the 208.130.28.0/22 block, capable of addressing just over 1000 devices. ARS used a /24 block for its publicly accessible servers, of which 208.130.29.33 was one. All of these CIDR prefixes would be used, at different locations in the network. Outside MCI's network, the 208.128.0.0/11 prefix would be used to direct to MCI traffic bound not only for 208.130.29.33, but also for any of the roughly two million IP addresses with the same initial 11 bits. Within MCI's network, 208.130.28.0/22 would become visible, directing traffic to the leased line serving ARS. Only within the ARS corporate network would the 208.130.29.0/24 prefix have been used.

IPv4 CIDR blocks

[edit]
Address
format
Difference
to last address
Mask Addresses Relative
to class
A, B, C
Restrictions
on a, b, c and d
(0..255 unless noted)
Typical use
Decimal 2n
a.b.c.d/32 255.255.255.255 1 20 1256 C Host route
a.b.c.d/31 +0.0.0.1 255.255.255.254 2 21 1128 C d = 0 ... (2n) ... 254 Point-to-point links (RFC 3021)
a.b.c.d/30 +0.0.0.3 255.255.255.252 4 22 164 C d = 0 ... (4n) ... 252 Point-to-point links (glue network)
a.b.c.d/29 +0.0.0.7 255.255.255.248 8 23 132 C d = 0 ... (8n) ... 248 Smallest multi-host network
a.b.c.d/28 +0.0.0.15 255.255.255.240 16 24 116 C d = 0 ... (16n) ... 240 Small LAN
a.b.c.d/27 +0.0.0.31 255.255.255.224 32 25 18 C d = 0 ... (32n) ... 224
a.b.c.d/26 +0.0.0.63 255.255.255.192 64 26 14 C d = 0, 64, 128, 192
a.b.c.d/25 +0.0.0.127 255.255.255.128 128 27 12 C d = 0, 128 Large LAN
a.b.c.0/24 +0.0.0.255 255.255.255.0 256 28 1 C
a.b.c.0/23 +0.0.1.255 255.255.254.0 512 29 2 C c = 0 ... (2n) ... 254
a.b.c.0/22 +0.0.3.255 255.255.252.0 1,024 210 4 C c = 0 ... (4n) ... 252 Small business
a.b.c.0/21 +0.0.7.255 255.255.248.0 2,048 211 8 C c = 0 ... (8n) ... 248 Small ISP/ large business
a.b.c.0/20 +0.0.15.255 255.255.240.0 4,096 212 16 C c = 0 ... (16n) ... 240
a.b.c.0/19 +0.0.31.255 255.255.224.0 8,192 213 32 C c = 0 ... (32n) ... 224 ISP/ large business
a.b.c.0/18 +0.0.63.255 255.255.192.0 16,384 214 64 C c = 0, 64, 128, 192
a.b.c.0/17 +0.0.127.255 255.255.128.0 32,768 215 128 C c = 0, 128
a.b.0.0/16 +0.0.255.255 255.255.0.0 65,536 216 256 C = B
a.b.0.0/15 +0.1.255.255 255.254.0.0 131,072 217 2 B b = 0 ... (2n) ... 254
a.b.0.0/14 +0.3.255.255 255.252.0.0 262,144 218 4 B b = 0 ... (4n) ... 252
a.b.0.0/13 +0.7.255.255 255.248.0.0 524,288 219 8 B b = 0 ... (8n) ... 248
a.b.0.0/12 +0.15.255.255 255.240.0.0 1,048,576 220 16 B b = 0 ... (16n) ... 240
a.b.0.0/11 +0.31.255.255 255.224.0.0 2,097,152 221 32 B b = 0 ... (32n) ... 224
a.b.0.0/10 +0.63.255.255 255.192.0.0 4,194,304 222 64 B b = 0, 64, 128, 192
a.b.0.0/9 +0.127.255.255 255.128.0.0 8,388,608 223 128 B b = 0, 128
a.0.0.0/8 +0.255.255.255 255.0.0.0 16,777,216 224 256 B = A Largest IANA block allocation
a.0.0.0/7 +1.255.255.255 254.0.0.0 33,554,432 225 2 A a = 0 ... (2n) ... 254
a.0.0.0/6 +3.255.255.255 252.0.0.0 67,108,864 226 4 A a = 0 ... (4n) ... 252
a.0.0.0/5 +7.255.255.255 248.0.0.0 134,217,728 227 8 A a = 0 ... (8n) ... 248
a.0.0.0/4 +15.255.255.255 240.0.0.0 268,435,456 228 16 A a = 0 ... (16n) ... 240
a.0.0.0/3 +31.255.255.255 224.0.0.0 536,870,912 229 32 A a = 0 ... (32n) ... 224
a.0.0.0/2 +63.255.255.255 192.0.0.0 1,073,741,824 230 64 A a = 0, 64, 128, 192
a.0.0.0/1 +127.255.255.255 128.0.0.0 2,147,483,648 231 128 A a = 0, 128
0.0.0.0/0 +255.255.255.255 0.0.0.0 4,294,967,296 232 256 A Entire IPv4 Internet, default route

In routed subnets larger than /31 or /32, the number of available host addresses is usually reduced by two, namely the largest address, which is reserved as the broadcast address, and the smallest address, which identifies the network itself[15] and is reserved solely for this purpose.[16]

In such usage, a /31 network, with one binary digit in the host identifier, is unusable, as such a subnet would provide no available host addresses after this reduction. RFC 3021 creates an exception to the "host all ones" and "host all zeros" rules to make /31 networks usable for point-to-point links. /32 addresses (single-host network) must be accessed by explicit routing rules, as there is no address available for a gateway.

IPv6 CIDR blocks

[edit]
IPv6 CIDR prefixes
Prefix size Number of equivalent subnets Interface ID bits
/48 /56 /64
/24 16M 4G 1T 104
/25 8M 2G 512G 103
/26 4M 1G 256G 102
/27 2M 512M 128G 101
/28 1M 256M 64G 100
/29 512K 128M 32G 99
/30 256K 64M 16G 98
/31 128K 32M 8G 97
/32 64K 16M 4G 96
/33 32K 8M 2G 95
/34 16K 4M 1G 94
/35 8K 2M 512M 93
/36 4K 1M 256M 92
/37 2K 512K 128M 91
/38 1K 256K 64M 90
/39 512 128K 32M 89
/40 256 64K 16M 88
/41 128 32K 8M 87
/42 64 16K 4M 86
/43 32 8K 2M 85
/44 16 4K 1M 84
/45 8 2K 512K 83
/46 4 1K 256K 82
/47 2 512 128K 81
/48 1 256 64K 80
/49 128 32K 79
/50 64 16K 78
/51 32 8K 77
/52 16 4K 76
/53 8 2K 75
/54 4 1K 74
/55 2 512 73
/56 1 256 72
/57 128 71
/58 64 70
/59 32 69
/60 16 68
/61 8 67
/62 4 66
/63 2 65
/64 1 64
K = 1,024
M = 1,048,576
G = 1,073,741,824
T = 1,099,511,627,776

The large address size of IPv6 permitted worldwide route summarization and guaranteed sufficient address pools at each site. The standard subnet size for IPv6 networks is a /64 block, which is required for the operation of stateless address autoconfiguration.[17] At first, the IETF recommended in RFC 3177 as a best practice that all end sites receive /48 address allocations,[18] but criticism and reevaluation of actual needs and practices has led to more flexible allocation recommendations in RFC 6177[19] suggesting a significantly smaller allocation for some sites, such as a /56 block for residential networks.

This IPv6 subnetting reference lists the sizes for IPv6 subnetworks. Different types of network links may require different subnet sizes.[20] The subnet mask separates the bits of the network identifier prefix from the bits of the interface identifier. Selecting a smaller prefix size results in fewer number of networks covered, but with more addresses within each network.[21]

2001:0db8:0123:4567:89ab:cdef:1234:5678
|||| |||| |||| |||| |||| |||| |||| ||||
|||| |||| |||| |||| |||| |||| |||| |||128     Single end-points and loopback
|||| |||| |||| |||| |||| |||| |||| |||127   Point-to-point links (inter-router)
|||| |||| |||| |||| |||| |||| |||| ||124
|||| |||| |||| |||| |||| |||| |||| |120
|||| |||| |||| |||| |||| |||| |||| 116
|||| |||| |||| |||| |||| |||| |||112
|||| |||| |||| |||| |||| |||| ||108
|||| |||| |||| |||| |||| |||| |104
|||| |||| |||| |||| |||| |||| 100
|||| |||| |||| |||| |||| |||96
|||| |||| |||| |||| |||| ||92
|||| |||| |||| |||| |||| |88
|||| |||| |||| |||| |||| 84
|||| |||| |||| |||| |||80
|||| |||| |||| |||| ||76
|||| |||| |||| |||| |72
|||| |||| |||| |||| 68
|||| |||| |||| |||64   Single LAN; default prefix size for SLAAC
|||| |||| |||| ||60   Some (very limited) 6rd deployments (/60 = 16 /64 blocks)
|||| |||| |||| |56   Minimal end-site assignment;[19] e.g. home network (/56 = 256 /64 blocks)
|||| |||| |||| 52   /52 block = 4096 /64 blocks
|||| |||| |||48   Typical assignment for larger sites (/48 = 65536 /64 blocks)
|||| |||| ||44
|||| |||| |40
|||| |||| 36   possible future local Internet registry (LIR) extra-small allocations
|||| |||32   LIR minimum allocations
|||| ||28   LIR medium allocations
|||| |24   LIR large allocations
|||| 20   LIR extra large allocations
|||16
||12   Regional Internet registry (RIR) allocations from IANA[22]
|8
4

Numerical interpretation

[edit]

Topologically, the set of subnets described by CIDR represent a cover of the corresponding address space. The interval described by the notation numerically corresponds to addresses of the form (for IPv4) and (for IPv6), where and has the lower bits set to 0. For a fixed , the set of all subnets constitute a partition, that is a cover of non-overlapping sets. Increasing yields finer and finer subpartitions. Thus two subnets and are either disjoint or one is a subnet of the other.

Prefix aggregation

[edit]

CIDR provides fine-grained routing prefix aggregation. For example, if the first 20 bits of their network prefixes match, sixteen contiguous /24 networks can be aggregated and advertised to a larger network as a single /20 routing table entry. This reduces the number of routes that have to be advertised.

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia
from Grokipedia
Classless Inter-Domain Routing (CIDR) is a method for allocating IP addresses and IP packets that replaces the rigid classful addressing system (Classes A, B, and C) with a flexible, hierarchical prefix-based scheme using variable-length masking (VLSM). This approach enables network administrators to assign address blocks of arbitrary sizes, improving IPv4 address space utilization and reducing the growth of global tables by allowing route aggregation across autonomous systems. Introduced to address the impending exhaustion of Class B addresses and the explosion of entries in the early , CIDR has become a foundational element of IP networking. CIDR employs slash notation (e.g., 192.0.2.0/24), where the is followed by a slash and a number n indicating the length of the network prefix in bits; the remaining 32 - n bits are available for host addresses. For instance, a /24 prefix allocates 256 addresses (2^8), suitable for small to medium networks, while larger blocks like /8 provide over 16 million addresses. decisions use longest-prefix matching, where routers select the most specific prefix that matches the destination IP, enabling efficient aggregation of multiple smaller prefixes into a single larger one when addresses are contiguous and topologically aligned. This aggregation is typically performed by Internet Service Providers (ISPs) based on provider-subscriber hierarchies, minimizing the number of entries in (BGP) tables. Developed by the (IETF) in the early 1990s through the ROAD (Routing and Addressing) working group, CIDR was first specified in RFC 1519 in September 1993 as a temporary measure expected to extend IPv4's lifespan for 3-5 years. Deployment began in late 1992 with the establishment of the first regional Internet registry, , for allocating Class C blocks in contiguous ranges, and by 1994, BGP-4 implementations from vendors like supported CIDR. The specification was updated and obsoleted by RFC 4632 in 2006 to clarify concepts and reflect widespread adoption, which has far exceeded initial expectations. Today, CIDR remains essential for Internet scalability, with address allocation managed hierarchically by the (IANA), Regional Internet Registries (RIRs), and local providers.

History and Motivation

Background and Development

In the early 1990s, the rapid expansion of the Internet highlighted critical limitations in the classful addressing system, particularly the depletion of Class B address space and the exponential growth of routing tables, which threatened the scalability of global IP routing. By January 1993, over 7,133 Class B networks had been allocated, with allocations doubling annually, while routing tables had swelled to approximately 8,561 entries by December 1992 and were projected to exceed 30,000 within two years without intervention. These challenges stemmed from inefficient address allocation under the classful model, where fixed block sizes often led to waste, and the lack of aggregation mechanisms exacerbated router memory and processing demands. Discussions on Internet scalability began as early as 1990-1992 within IETF working groups and ad hoc teams like the ROAD (Routing and Addressing) group, building on earlier concepts such as Variable-Length Subnet Masking (VLSM) for intra-domain flexibility, which influenced the need for an inter-domain solution. Classless Inter-Domain Routing (CIDR) emerged as a direct response to these issues, formalized by the (IETF) in September 1993 through RFC 1518, which outlined an architecture for IP address allocation, and RFC 1519, which detailed the aggregation strategy. Key contributors included Yakov Rekhter and Tony Li for RFC 1518, and Vince Fuller, Tony Li, , and Kannan Varadhan for RFC 1519, representing organizations such as , Cisco Systems, BARRNet, MERIT, and OARnet. These efforts extended VLSM principles to inter-domain routing, enabling variable-length prefixes to aggregate routes and conserve the 32-bit IPv4 as a shared community resource. Initial deployment of CIDR began in late 1993, supported by early router vendor implementations and the formation of regional registries like , which managed initial Class C block allocations. By 1994, the introduction of BGP-4 further facilitated route aggregation, leading to widespread adoption across Internet service providers by the mid-1990s. Although designed as a short-term measure viable for three to five years, CIDR significantly delayed —originally projected for the late 1990s—extending usability into the 2010s through efficient allocation practices adopted by organizations like the (ARIN), established in 1997.

Comparison to Classful Routing

Classful routing, the original IP addressing scheme, divided the IPv4 address space into fixed classes—A, B, and C—with predefined network prefix lengths of /8 (over 16 million addresses), /16 ( addresses), and /24 (256 addresses), respectively. This rigid structure often resulted in significant address waste, as organizations were assigned entire classes regardless of their actual needs; for instance, a mid-sized entity requiring around 1,000 addresses would receive a full Class B block of addresses, leaving the majority unused. By early 1993, over 7,000 Class B networks had been allocated out of 16,382 available, with allocations doubling annually and risking exhaustion within 15 months. In contrast, CIDR introduces variable-length prefix lengths, allowing networks to be subdivided or combined flexibly without adhering to class boundaries, thereby enabling both subnetting for finer and supernetting for broader aggregation. This departs from classful routing's fixed sizes, which prohibited such adjustments and forced inefficient allocations. Prefix aggregation in CIDR further enhances this by summarizing multiple contiguous routes into a single entry, a capability absent in classful systems. CIDR markedly improved efficiency by conserving addresses through optimal block sizing and curbing explosive growth; pre-CIDR, the global expanded from 244 entries in 1988 to 8,561 by December 1992, doubling roughly every 10 months and projected to hit 30,000 within two years without intervention. Post-CIDR deployment in 1993–1994, growth stabilized dramatically—for example, projections estimated the table would reach only about 5,650 entries after three years with aggregation, compared to 75,000 without, and historical data confirms this moderation as the table hovered around 50,000–60,000 entries for much of the late and early . Address conservation was equally impactful, as CIDR facilitated reuse of underutilized blocks by reallocating them in smaller, tailored chunks, averting the classful system's utilization inefficiencies in Class B assignments.
ScenarioOrganization Size (Addresses Needed)Classful AllocationAddresses WastedCIDR AllocationAddresses Wasted
Small network100Class C (/24): 256156 (61%)/25: 12828 (22%)
Medium network1,000Class B (/16): 64,536 (98%)/22: 1,02424 (2%)
Large network10,000Class B (/16): 55,536 (85%)/18: 16,3846,384 (39%)
This table illustrates representative allocation efficiencies, where classful methods routinely underutilized space due to inflexibility, while CIDR minimizes waste through precise prefix matching.

Core Concepts

CIDR Notation

Classless Inter-Domain Routing (CIDR) notation provides a compact way to represent IP network addresses and their associated prefix lengths, enabling efficient specification of address ranges without relying on traditional class boundaries. The standard format consists of an in dotted- notation (for IPv4) or notation (for ), followed by a forward slash (/) and a number indicating the prefix , which denotes the number of significant bits in the network portion of the address. For example, the notation 192.0.2.0/24 specifies that the first 24 bits of the 32-bit IPv4 address 192.0.2.0 form the network prefix, allowing the remaining 8 bits to identify individual hosts within that network. Similarly, for , an example like 2001:db8::/32 indicates the first 32 bits as the prefix in a 128-bit . The prefix in CIDR notation ranges from 0 to 32 bits for IPv4 addresses and from 0 to 128 bits for addresses, providing flexibility in defining network sizes from the entire address space down to a single host. A prefix of /0 represents the , encompassing all possible addresses (2^32 for IPv4 or 2^128 for ), while /32 for IPv4 or /128 for denotes a single host route with no additional host bits available. In terms of coverage, a shorter prefix results in a larger block; for instance, a /24 prefix in IPv4 covers 256 addresses (2^(32-24)), which is commonly used for small to medium-sized networks. This notation directly corresponds to the binary representation of subnet masks, where the prefix equals the number of leading 1 bits in the mask. CIDR notation for IPv4 was standardized in RFC 4632, published in 2006 by the (IETF), which updated and obsoleted earlier specifications like RFC 1519 from 1993 to formalize the addressing and aggregation strategy. For IPv6, the prefix notation is specified in RFC 4291. This standardization addressed the limitations of classful by introducing variable-length subnet masking (VLSM) support. In practice, CIDR notation is widely used in protocols and configuration tools, such as the (BGP) for inter-domain route advertisement and the (OSPF) protocol for intra-domain , where prefixes are exchanged to enable route aggregation and efficient forwarding tables.

Subnet Masks and Prefix Lengths

For IPv4, a subnet mask is a 32-bit value that divides an into a network portion and a host portion by applying a bitwise AND operation. In binary form, the mask consists of a contiguous sequence of 1s followed by 0s, where the 1s represent the fixed network bits and the 0s represent the variable host bits; for example, the /24 prefix corresponds to the dotted-decimal mask 255.255.255.0, which in binary is 11111111.11111111.11111111.00000000. This contiguous structure ensures that the mask aligns with the hierarchical nature of IP addressing, preventing non-contiguous bit patterns that could complicate . For IPv6, prefix lengths define the equivalent division into subnet prefix and interface identifier without using traditional subnet masks. The prefix length, denoted by /n in CIDR notation, specifies the number of leading bits (n) in the that are fixed as the network prefix, equivalent to the position of the last 1 in the subnet mask for IPv4. For IPv4, this leaves 32 - n bits for host addressing, allowing up to 2^(32 - n) total addresses in the , including the network and broadcast addresses. In , the prefix length similarly defines the fixed bits in the 128-bit address, with the remaining bits allocated for interface identifiers, typically 64 bits for global addresses, yielding 2^(128 - n) possible addresses. This equivalence between masks and prefix lengths enables efficient representation and aggregation of address blocks without specifying the full mask in binary or decimal form. To determine the network address from an IP address, a bitwise AND operation is performed between the IP address and the subnet mask for IPv4, zeroing out the host bits. For instance, the IPv4 address 192.168.1.100 with a /24 mask (255.255.255.0) results in the network address 192.168.1.0, as the first 24 bits remain unchanged while the last 8 bits are set to 0. This operation is fundamental to decisions, ensuring that packets are forwarded based on the shared network prefix. Variable Length Subnet Masking (VLSM) integrates with CIDR for IPv4 by permitting of different sizes within a larger allocated block, using varying prefix lengths to optimize address usage. For example, a /16 block can be subdivided into non-contiguous /21 and /22 as needed, allowing efficient allocation for networks of differing scales without wasting addresses in fixed-size classes. This flexibility is essential for conserving the IPv4 address space and supports similar variable prefixing in deployments. The following table shows the dotted-decimal and binary representations for common IPv4 prefix lengths:
Prefix LengthDotted-Decimal MaskBinary Representation
/8255.0.0.011111111.00000000.00000000.00000000
/16255.255.0.011111111.11111111.00000000.00000000
/24255.255.255.011111111.11111111.11111111.00000000

Address Allocation

CIDR Blocks and Assignment

CIDR blocks represent contiguous ranges of IP addresses that share a common network prefix, allowing for flexible and efficient allocation to minimize sizes across the . These blocks are specified using CIDR notation, where the prefix length indicates the number of bits fixed for the network portion, determining the block's size; for instance, a /20 block encompasses 4,096 addresses (2^(32-20)). This structure supports variable-length masking (VLSM), enabling the division of into s of differing sizes without adhering to rigid class boundaries, thereby promoting conservation and scalability in . The assignment of CIDR blocks follows a hierarchical process managed by authoritative bodies to ensure global coordination and equitable distribution. The (IANA), under the (ICANN), allocates large pools of unallocated IP addresses to the five Regional Internet Registries (RIRs): the (ARIN) for North America, the Réseaux IP Européens Network Coordination Centre () for Europe and the Middle East, the (APNIC) for Asia and Oceania, the (LACNIC) for Latin America and the Caribbean, and the (AFRINIC) for Africa. RIRs then distribute smaller CIDR blocks to Local Internet Registries (LIRs), typically Internet Service Providers (ISPs) and other network operators, based on demonstrated need and regional policies; LIRs subsequently assign portions to end-users such as organizations and individuals. This tiered model facilitates decentralized management while maintaining a unified global registry system. Allocation policies emphasize conservation and justification to prevent wasteful distribution, as outlined in RFC 2050, which provides guidelines for IP address registries. RIRs require applicants to demonstrate utilization rates—typically 25% immediate use and 50% within one year—for requested blocks, with minimum sizes determined by need; for example, small organizations often receive a /24 block (256 addresses) as the smallest routable unit, while larger entities justify /20 or bigger based on projected growth and efficiency. These principles aim to extend the usability of the finite IP address pool, prohibiting reallocation beyond the assignee's organization without registry approval. Global management of the IP address pool has been strained by IPv4 exhaustion, with IANA depleting its free pool in 2011, prompting RIRs to implement post-exhaustion mechanisms such as recovering unused addresses and facilitating transfers. Most RIRs reached exhaustion shortly thereafter: in April 2011, in September 2012, ARIN in September 2015, in June 2014 (with final depletion in August 2020), and entering exhaustion phases in March 2017. However, as of 2025, is experiencing a governance crisis that has led to disruptions in resource allocations. Tools like the protocol enable public lookups of assigned CIDR blocks, revealing ownership, allocation dates, and contact details through RIR databases to support transparency and troubleshooting. Improper assignment practices, particularly deaggregation—where larger CIDR blocks are subdivided and announced as more specific prefixes—can lead to routing inefficiencies by inflating the Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) routing tables. This fragmentation increases memory and processing demands on routers, potentially causing convergence delays, higher operational costs, and scalability issues across the , as evidenced by studies showing deaggregation contributing significantly to table growth rates exceeding 10% annually in the early . To mitigate these risks, policies discourage unnecessary deaggregation, favoring aggregation where possible to maintain CIDR's efficiency goals.

IPv4 Specifics

In IPv4, CIDR enables flexible allocation of address blocks based on prefix lengths, where common sizes are tailored to network scale. For instance, a /8 block provides 16,777,216 addresses, suitable for large regional networks or ISPs, while a /24 block offers 256 addresses, ideal for small sites or subnets. These allocations follow the formula of 2^(32 - prefix length) usable host addresses, excluding network and broadcast. The following table summarizes standard IPv4 CIDR block sizes from /13 to /27, highlighting address counts and subnet masks for reference:
Prefix LengthNumber of AddressesSubnet Mask
/13524,288255.248.0.0
/14262,144255.252.0.0
/15131,072255.254.0.0
/1665,536255.255.0.0
/1732,768255.255.128.0
/1816,384255.255.192.0
/198,192255.255.224.0
/204,096255.255.240.0
/212,048255.255.248.0
/221,024255.255.252.0
/23512255.255.254.0
/24256255.255.255.0
/25128255.255.255.128
/2664255.255.255.192
/2732255.255.255.224
The exhaustion of the IANA IPv4 free pool occurred on February 3, 2011, when the last available /8 blocks were allocated to the Regional Registries (RIRs). In response, RIRs implemented strategies such as waiting lists for unmet requests and policies facilitating address transfers between organizations. For example, ARIN established a waiting list in 2015 following its own pool depletion and introduced transfer policies under ARIN-2015-2 to allow inter-organization and inter-RIR movements of IPv4 blocks, subject to restrictions like a 12-month cooldown for recipients. The transition from classful routing to CIDR, formalized in , addressed inefficiencies in fixed class boundaries by allowing variable-length prefixes, but it introduced legacy challenges like bogons—unallocated or IPv4 blocks that should not appear in public routing tables—and martian addresses, which are invalid packets from private, , or ranges (e.g., 127.0.0.0/8 or 10.0.0.0/8) that routers typically discard to prevent misrouting. In routing practice, CIDR aggregation reduces table sizes in ISP backbones; for example, a /20 block (4,096 addresses) can summarize 16 contiguous /24 blocks (each with 256 addresses), enabling a single route advertisement instead of 16, which optimizes propagation across core networks. As of late 2025, IPv4 scarcity persists, with no new allocations from RIR free pools, fueling secondary markets where blocks trade at premiums—often $25–$50 per address—while accelerating IPv6 migration to meet growing demand. IPv4 addresses are assigned hierarchically by IANA to RIRs, which sub-allocate to local registries and end users.

IPv6 Specifics and Adoption

In , Classless Inter-Domain Routing (CIDR) operates over a 128-bit , extending the subnet mask concept to support hierarchical allocations that prevent the address exhaustion issues prevalent in IPv4. Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) typically allocate /32 prefixes to Local Internet Registries (LIRs), which in turn assign /48 blocks to end-site organizations, enabling efficient aggregation and routing scalability. Within these /48 allocations, individual local area networks (LANs) are standardly subnetted as /64 prefixes, each providing 2^64 addresses to accommodate autoconfiguration and dense device deployments without fragmentation concerns. Unlike IPv4's focus on individual host assignments, IPv6 CIDR emphasizes to manage vast address pools, eliminating the need for (NAT) and simplifying end-to-end connectivity. Prefixes are delegated to customer sites via mechanisms such as Prefix Delegation, which assigns dynamic subnets to routers, or Stateless Address Autoconfiguration (SLAAC), which allows hosts to generate addresses from router advertisements without centralized state. As of November 2025, global adoption has reached approximately 45% of , driven by measurements from major content providers and registries, though regional disparities persist with economies leading at over 50% capability while and the average around 28%. A pivotal milestone was the World IPv6 Launch on June 6, 2012, when leading ISPs, websites, and device manufacturers permanently enabled IPv6 support, accelerating deployment and establishing it as a foundational event for widespread protocol integration. Transitioning to while leveraging CIDR introduces challenges, including the complexity of dual-stack operations where networks maintain parallel IPv4 and routing tables, potentially increasing BGP table sizes due to less aggressive aggregation in mixed environments. Tunneling mechanisms like , which encapsulate packets over IPv4 infrastructure, have faced reliability issues with failure rates of 20-30% on public networks, complicating CIDR-based route propagation. In BGP, CIDR enables route summarization similar to IPv4 but requires careful prefix management to avoid de-aggregation during transitions, as longer prefixes can inflate global routing tables. Policy evolution has refined CIDR practices; RFC 6177, published in 2011, shifted recommendations from /48 to /56 prefixes for most end-sites to conserve space while supporting multiple /64 subnets, balancing flexibility with global allocation efficiency. Current RIR guidelines, such as those from and , align with this by discouraging assignments longer than /56 absent compelling technical needs and promoting /48 only for large sites requiring extensive subnetworking.

Technical Details

Numerical Interpretation

In the topological view of IP addressing, a CIDR prefix of length /n for IPv4 represents a contiguous set of 232n2^{32-n} addresses within the 32-bit , where the block begins at an address that is a multiple of 232n2^{32-n}. This structure ensures hierarchical alignment, treating the address space as a where prefixes correspond to subtrees of fixed size. The , which defines the starting point of the block, is calculated by performing a bitwise AND operation between any in the prefix and the corresponding subnet mask: \text{[network address](/page/Network_address)} = \text{IP} \land \text{mask}. The full range of addresses covered by the prefix then spans from this to \text{[network address](/page/Network_address)} + 2^{32-n} - 1, inclusive. The subnet mask itself consists of n left-justified 1 bits followed by 32n32 - n 0 bits in binary representation, delineating the fixed prefix bits from the variable host bits. For instance, the prefix 10.0.0.0/8 has a of 255.0.0.0 (binary: 11111111.00000000.00000000.00000000), covering the address range from 10.0.0.0 to 10.255.255.255, which encompasses 224=16,777,2162^{24} = 16,777,216 addresses. This binary alignment guarantees that valid CIDR blocks do not partially overlap; instead, two prefixes are either disjoint (their address ranges have no intersection), or one is nested within the other (the shorter prefix fully contains the longer one if the network address of the longer prefix falls within the range of the shorter one and shares the same initial bits). For , the numerical interpretation extends analogously to the 128-bit , where a /n prefix denotes a set of 2128n2^{128-n} addresses starting from a multiple of 2128n2^{128-n}. The network address is similarly derived via bitwise AND with a mask of n leading 1s, and the range bounds follow the same additive formula adjusted for the larger exponent. emphasizes sparse allocation of prefixes to accommodate the vast while enabling efficient , often using longer prefixes (e.g., /64 for subnets) to minimize density in the topology.

Prefix Aggregation and Route Summarization

Prefix aggregation, also known as route summarization, in Classless Inter-Domain Routing (CIDR) involves combining multiple contiguous prefixes into a single, larger prefix to represent a broader range of addresses efficiently. This process requires that the prefixes be adjacent in the and typically of the same length to ensure the summary covers the exact range without gaps or overlaps. For instance, the prefixes 192.0.2.0/24 (covering 192.0.2.0 to 192.0.2.255) and 192.0.3.0/24 (covering 192.0.3.0 to 192.0.3.255) can be aggregated into 192.0.2.0/23 (covering 192.0.2.0 to 192.0.3.255), as they are contiguous and align on bit boundaries. A key condition for valid aggregation is the adjacency of prefixes, where the binary representations allow merging without leaving unrepresented addresses, and they must share the same prefix length for straightforward summarization. Routers employ the (LPM) principle during forwarding, ensuring that more specific routes (e.g., a /24) take precedence over the aggregated route (e.g., /23) when applicable, which preserves accuracy. The primary benefit of prefix aggregation is the reduction in the size of routing tables, particularly in the (BGP), where the global IPv4 routing table exceeded 1,036,000 entries by November 2025, making aggregation essential for manageability and scalability. By summarizing routes, network operators can limit the propagation of detailed prefixes, thereby decreasing memory usage, processing overhead, and the risk of across the . Algorithms for optimal prefix aggregation often model the problem as finding a minimal set of covering prefixes for a collection of more specific routes, akin to a set cover approach where disjoint intervals are merged greedily based on adjacency. In practice, BGP implementations use source-based aggregation by the originating autonomous system (AS), applying techniques like the "aggregate-address" command to generate summaries while suppressing specifics, guided by frameworks that prioritize hierarchical allocation. De-aggregation, the reverse process of advertising more specific prefixes within an aggregate, can lead to pitfalls such as blackholing, where traffic intended for a specific subnet is dropped if the more specific route is not consistently propagated or filtered across all paths due to LPM inconsistencies. Practical examples illustrate aggregation's utility: a provider allocated 16 contiguous /24 prefixes (e.g., 203.0.112.0/24 through 203.0.127.0/24) can summarize them into a single /20 prefix (203.0.112.0/20), reducing table entries from 16 to 1. For , where larger allocations are common, end-site /48 prefixes assigned to customers can be aggregated into a provider's /32 block, enabling efficient for vast spaces while maintaining CIDR principles of contiguous, bit-aligned summarization.

Applications and Implications

Practical Examples

In a typical ISP allocation , a might assign a /22 CIDR block, encompassing 1,024 IPv4 addresses, to a requiring moderate for its . This block, for instance, could be 192.168.0.0/22, allowing the business to it into three /24 networks—such as 192.168.0.0/24 for employee devices, 192.168.1.0/24 for servers, and 192.168.2.0/24 for guest access—each providing 256 addresses while conserving the overall allocation. The remaining addresses in the /22 can serve as a buffer for future expansion or point-to-point links, demonstrating how CIDR enables flexible, efficient subdivision without rigid class boundaries. For enterprises employing multi-homing to enhance redundancy and load balancing, CIDR facilitates the advertisement of a consolidated prefix, such as a /20 block (4,096 addresses), to multiple upstream ISPs via (BGP). Consider an organization with the prefix 10.0.0.0/20 connected to ISP A and ISP B; the enterprise's border routers announce this single aggregate route to both providers, enabling inbound traffic to enter via the optimal path while the ISPs propagate the summarized route further. This approach maintains route scalability, as the /20 can encompass internal subnets like /24s for departments, and BGP attributes such as AS_PATH ensure loop prevention across providers. Such configurations are common for medium-sized enterprises to achieve without fragmenting their address space across disparate announcements. In IPv4-to-IPv6 transition environments, CIDR supports mechanisms like 6rd () tunneling, where an ISP allocates a shared IPv4 prefix—often a /16 or larger CIDR block—to embed customer IPv4 within packets for encapsulation. For example, using a 192.0.2.0/24 prefix from the ISP's CIDR allocation, a customer's IPv4 (e.g., 192.0.2.10) is mapped into an like 2001:db8::192.0.2.10, allowing traffic to traverse the IPv4 infrastructure via tunnels to a 6rd border relay. Similarly, in dual-stack setups with translation, a well-known prefix (64:ff9b::/96) combined with CIDR-allocated IPv4 blocks enables stateless mapping; an enterprise might use a /20 IPv4 CIDR for internal hosts, translating outbound IPv4 traffic to by embedding the source IPv4 into the IPv6 destination. These techniques allow gradual adoption while leveraging existing CIDR-based IPv4 addressing. Troubleshooting CIDR deployments often involves identifying issues from misaggregated prefixes, such as when a more specific /24 route overlaps or conflicts within a broader /20 advertisement, potentially inducing loops. For instance, if an enterprise advertises 10.0.1.0/24 (a of 10.0.0.0/20) to one ISP without filtering, while the primary /20 is announced to another, BGP may select the more specific /24 for return traffic, causing packets to loop between providers if AS paths are not properly validated. Network engineers diagnose this by examining BGP tables for unexpected specifics (using commands like show ip bgp) and verifying prefix hierarchies to ensure aggregation aligns with allocation boundaries, preventing blackholing or suboptimal paths. Network administrators commonly use tools like ipcalc for verifying CIDR blocks during configuration and deployment. For example, running ipcalc 192.168.0.0/22 outputs the network range (192.168.0.0-192.168.3.255), usable hosts (1,022 addresses), and subnet details, helping confirm that a /22 allocation yields exactly three full /24 subnets without overlap. In packet analysis, Wireshark captures can be filtered by CIDR prefixes to inspect traffic adherence; a display filter like ip.addr == 10.0.0.0/20 isolates packets within the block, revealing if sources or destinations fall outside expected subnets, thus validating routing or detecting anomalies in live networks. These tools streamline operational tasks by providing quick numerical and visual confirmation of CIDR implementations.

Security Considerations

Classless Inter-Domain Routing (CIDR) introduces several security vulnerabilities primarily due to its reliance on BGP for prefix announcements and the flexibility of variable-length subnet masking. One prominent risk is prefix hijacking, where an autonomous system announces ownership of a prefix it does not legitimately hold, potentially redirecting traffic. A notable example occurred on , 2008, when Telecom (AS17557) unauthorizedly announced the prefix 208.65.153.0/24, de-aggregating it from ’s larger block and causing global outages for about two hours as traffic was misrouted. This incident highlighted how CIDR's aggregation can be exploited through more specific (de-aggregated) announcements that BGP prefers, enabling interception or denial of service. Additionally, IP spoofing thrives in environments with loose CIDR blocks, where ingress filtering is not strictly enforced; attackers can forge source addresses within a broad prefix, as loose unidirectional (uRPF) only verifies route existence without interface checks, allowing spoofing across customer boundaries. To mitigate these threats, cryptographic validation mechanisms like (RPKI) are employed to authenticate CIDR prefix ownership in BGP announcements. RPKI uses digitally signed Route Origin Authorizations (ROAs) to verify that an Autonomous System is authorized to originate a specific prefix, preventing unauthorized hijacking by rejecting invalid routes during BGP route origin validation (ROV). As of March 2025, over 50% of both IPv4 and routes in the global BGP table are secured with RPKI. Complementing this, Best Current Practice 38 (BCP 38), outlined in RFC 2827, recommends network ingress filtering to block outbound packets with spoofed source addresses not matching the sender's assigned CIDR block, thereby reducing the feasibility of spoofing-based attacks like DDoS reflection. These measures address CIDR's inherent trust in announcements but require widespread for effectiveness. Subnetting risks in CIDR arise from overly broad prefixes, which expand the and facilitate man-in-the-middle (MITM) attacks through techniques like ARP poisoning within the . Larger CIDR blocks obscure internal segmentation, allowing an attacker to intercept by spoofing addresses in the shared prefix, as seen in environments where broadcast domains are not tightly controlled. In implementations, the standard /64 size mandated for Stateless Address Autoconfiguration (SLAAC) exposes a vast (2^64 addresses), increasing to scanning and unauthorized access if privacy extensions are not used, as autoconfiguration relies on predictable interface identifiers that can reveal device presence. This fixed prefix length, while enabling plug-and-play deployment, contrasts with IPv4's more flexible CIDR subnetting and amplifies risks in unsecured networks. Best practices for securing CIDR include enforcing strict prefix length policies aligned with Regional Internet Registry (RIR) allocations to limit de-aggregation and hijacking opportunities, as recommended in Mutually Agreed Norms for Routing Security (MANRS). Network operators should also monitor and filter bogon announcements—unallocated or unannounced CIDR prefixes that should not appear in routing tables—using tools like the CIDR Report to block potentially malicious routes and maintain global routing table integrity.

References

Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.