[101503] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Using x.x.x.0 and x.x.x.255 host addresses in supernets.
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jon Lewis)
Tue Jan 8 10:27:00 2008
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 10:26:09 -0500 (EST)
From: Jon Lewis <jlewis@lewis.org>
To: Joe Provo <nanog-post@rsuc.gweep.net>
cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <20080108145822.GA39711@gweep.net>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On Tue, 8 Jan 2008, Joe Provo wrote:
>> Until you assign a .255/32 to a router loopback interface and then find
>> that you can't get to it because some silly router between you and it
>> thinks '.255? that's a broadcast address.'
>
> See the qualifier "where you don't care that broken or archaic systems
> cannot reach them". If you have brokenness on your internal systems
> then yes, you'd be shooting yourself in the foot.
Until you shoot yourself in the foot, how would you know you have such
brokenness on your internal systems? That silly router happened to be a
7206 running (IIRC) 12.1T code.
Unless you really don't care about the brokenness, or really want to root
it all out, I'd avoid using .0 and .255 IPs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jon Lewis | I route
Senior Network Engineer | therefore you are
Atlantic Net |
_________ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________
