[145782] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Did Internap lose all clue?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jack Bates)
Thu Oct 20 20:42:01 2011
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 19:39:51 -0500
From: Jack Bates <jbates@brightok.net>
To: Ryan Rawdon <ryan@u13.net>
In-Reply-To: <829895D9-6EBE-447D-A14A-EC911CB2D625@u13.net>
Cc: nanog <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 10/20/2011 4:03 PM, Ryan Rawdon wrote:
> "You should expect<our prefix>.1 to respond to ping and such, but not 2<our prefix>.0 as that is only capable of representing a subnet and not a network interface of any kind, or any machine, at all"
Honestly, though. Can you blame them in this case? Given the lack of
insight into your network, I also might question your numbering system
(given the number of people who use .0 and .255 in /24 Ethernet
segments). Although, there are still perfectly good reasons never to use
.0 or .255 in production networks, even if it does work most of the time.
I just finished griping at some vendors for using .0/31 on the first ptp
link. Sure, it works, it might always work, but I'll be mighty pissed
when I have to renumber core interfaces because some stupid software
program freaks about it. I can live with 126 ptp links per /24 in 1918
space of all things.
Jack
