mdgm wrote:subnet mask should be 255.255.255.0, I think.
Please open a tech support case and post your case number.
Agreed. That is why I said it shouldn't matter.Slasky wrote:255.255.0.0 is still a valid subnetmask, the only difference is that he now has 65 000 possible hosts within that network, rather than 254 which you get from the 255.255.255.0 subnetmask. As long as the subnet-masks are the same on both NAS and client, then they should be able to reach each other.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests