[14716] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Reporting Little Blue Men
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (James R. Fisher)
Thu Jan 22 16:40:30 1998
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 11:35:20 -0800 (PST)
From: "James R. Fisher" <JFISHER@OMEGA7.WR.USGS.GOV>
Cc: NANOG@merit.edu
X-VMS-To: MX%"justin@priori.net"
I have had just the opposite experience; my local LAN is w.x.48.0/20 , and so
I have 15 perfectly good w.x.y.0 and w.x.y.255 addresses other than the
wire/broadcast addresses. I have assigned most of them to a variety of machines,
and so far the only grok-failure came from Windows95 boxen, which dislike
w.x.y.255 . This is not altogether surprising, given MS's notable proficiency
in networking...
-jrf
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
At 11:41 AM 1/22/98 -0500, Eric Osborne wrote:
>In other words, I can't prevent my customers from sending packets to
>a broadcast address, esp. on a subnet smaller than /24. You might be
>able to block outgoing packets for destination x.y.z.255, but if you've got
>a mask >/24 (/23, etc..), couldn't .255 be a valid host address?
Yes, it could be, actually. I tried to use it as WAN pool address once
though and it horrendously confused the RAS, as well as several UNIX boxen
on the network.
**************************************************************
Justin W. Newton voice: +1-650-482-2840
Senior Network Architect fax: +1-650-482-2844
PRIORI NETWORKS, INC. http://www.priori.net
Legislative and Policy Director, ISP/C http://www.ispc.org
"The People You Know. The People You Trust."
**************************************************************
