[145000] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Strange static route
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Joel Maslak)
Fri Sep 23 21:19:34 2011
From: Joel Maslak <jmaslak@antelope.net>
In-Reply-To: <CAPLq3UPDGcq5gi_5XSz47riZf_jytypHfZL_CH7khyZuU6opzg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 19:18:42 -0600
To: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Protection against learning a bad default route through whatever routing pro=
tocol they are learning, since these two routes would be more specific than a=
ny typical default route. They probably got burned learning a default route=
.
On Sep 23, 2011, at 7:12 PM, Glen Kent <glen.kent@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>=20
> I have seen a few operators adding static routes like:
> 0.0.0.0/1 some next-hop and
> 128.0.0.0/1 some next-hop.
>=20
> Why would anyone want to add such static routes? What does 0.0.0.0/1
> mean. Note that the netmask is 1 and not 0.
>=20
> Thanks,
> Glen
>=20
