nanog mailing list archives
Re: .255 addresses still not usable after all these years?
From: Peter Dambier <peter () peter-dambier de>
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2008 00:09:10 +0200
I have had a look into the manuals of my ISP's routers. Those boxes can think in /24 only. The split whatever you have down to several /24 and reserve both .0 and .255 in each of them. I have seen both .0 and .255 in the WLAN behind NAT working but you have to ifconfig the interface via telnet. The html configuration wont allow to do it. Kind regards Peter David Andersen wrote:
On Jun 13, 2008, at 4:11 PM, Christopher Morrow wrote:On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 3:16 PM, <Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu> wrote:On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 15:08:47 EDT, David Hubbard said:I remember back in the day of old hardware and operating systems we'd intentionally avoid using .255 IP addresses for anything even when the netmask on our side would have made it fine, so I just thought I'd try it out for kicks today. From two of four ISP's it worked fine, from Verizon FIOS and Road Runner commercial, it didn't. So I guess that old problem still lingers?RFC1519 is 15 years old now. I *still* heard a trainer (in a Cisco class no less) mention class A/B/C in the last few months. Some evil will obviously take generations to fully stamp out. Anybody from Verizon FIOS or RoadRunner care to explain why David is seeing an issue in 2008?not from either, and hopefully david will follow back up with some of his findings, but.. I'd bet dollars to donuts it's the ultra-crappy CPE both vendors ship :( go-go-actiontec (vol sends those out, god do they suck...)Or leftover filters from before 'no ip directed-broadcast' in the days of Smurf attacks. -Dave
-- Peter and Karin Dambier Cesidian Root - Radice Cesidiana Rimbacher Strasse 16 D-69509 Moerlenbach-Bonsweiher +49(6209)795-816 (Telekom) +49(6252)750-308 (VoIP: sipgate.de) mail: peter () peter-dambier de http://www.peter-dambier.de/ http://iason.site.voila.fr/ https://sourceforge.net/projects/iason/
Current thread:
- .255 addresses still not usable after all these years? David Hubbard (Jun 13)
- Re: .255 addresses still not usable after all these years? Valdis . Kletnieks (Jun 13)
- Re: .255 addresses still not usable after all these years? Christopher Morrow (Jun 13)
- Re: .255 addresses still not usable after all these years? David Andersen (Jun 13)
- Re: .255 addresses still not usable after all these years? Peter Dambier (Jun 13)
- Re: .255 addresses still not usable after all these years? Kameron Gasso (Jun 13)
- Re: .255 addresses still not usable after all these years? Mark Smith (Jun 13)
- Re: .255 addresses still not usable after all these years? Tim Durack (Jun 13)
- Re: .255 addresses still not usable after all these years? Christopher Morrow (Jun 13)
- Re: .255 addresses still not usable after all these years? Valdis . Kletnieks (Jun 13)
- Re: .255 addresses still not usable after all these years? David Coulson (Jun 13)
- Re: .255 addresses still not usable after all these years? Mike Lewinski (Jun 13)
- Re: .255 addresses still not usable after all these years? William Allen Simpson (Jun 13)
- Re: .255 addresses still not usable after all these years? Jared (Jun 13)