[157441] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Issues encountered with assigning .0 and .255 as usable addresses?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Matt Buford)
Mon Oct 22 18:18:31 2012
In-Reply-To: <73A9A2579638014A8254BF9FE31DDB244FAF4FA6@mbx2.jiveland.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 17:18:16 -0500
From: Matt Buford <matt@overloaded.net>
To: Paul Zugnoni <paul.zugnoni@jivesoftware.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 5:07 PM, Paul Zugnoni <paul.zugnoni@jivesoftware.co=
m
> wrote:
> Any experience or recommendations? Besides replace the ISA proxy=85. Sinc=
e
> it's not mine to replace. Also curious whether there's an RFC recommendin=
g
> against the use of .0 or .255 addresses for this reason.
>
Way back in the late 90's I tried this with a /23 dialup DHCP pool and
quickly found that the .0 and .255 users couldn't get to some scattered web
sites, though they seemed to be able to get to most of the Internet.
However, a year or so ago I spun up an always-on Amazon ec2 instance with a
static IP and was handed a .0 address. I still use this VM regularly and
have not run into any problems with reachability for this address.
