nanog mailing list archives
Re: Issues encountered with assigning .0 and .255 as usable addresses?
From: Joe Greco <jgreco () ns sol net>
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 18:07:10 -0500 (CDT)
d be considered invalid. When you have a pool of assignable addresses, you = should expect to see x.x.x.0 and x.x.x.255 in passing traffic (ie. VIP or N= AT pool, or subnets larger than /24). Yet I've run into a commercial IP mgm= t product and getting reports of M$ ISA proxy that is specifically blocking= traffic for an IP ending in .0 or .255.
To make a long story short: If it's a product you're considering buying, problems with .0 and .255 reflect on the competence of the product's designers. You can safely assume that there are many other Severely Broken Things too and move on to saner products. For general Internet use, there is a lot of gear out there that's ten or more years old. You should avoid using .0 and .255 addresses if you can avoid it, though it's a shame to waste valid IP space to accommodate the brokenness of someone else's stuff. Some of us park stuff on .0 and .255 addresses in order to motivate others to change. ... JG -- Joe Greco - sol.net Network Services - Milwaukee, WI - http://www.sol.net "We call it the 'one bite at the apple' rule. Give me one chance [and] then I won't contact you again." - Direct Marketing Ass'n position on e-mail spam(CNN) With 24 million small businesses in the US alone, that's way too many apples.
Current thread:
- Issues encountered with assigning .0 and .255 as usable addresses? Paul Zugnoni (Oct 22)
- Re: Issues encountered with assigning .0 and .255 as usable addresses? Bryan Tong (Oct 22)
- Re: Issues encountered with assigning .0 and .255 as usable addresses? Matt Buford (Oct 22)
- Re: Issues encountered with assigning .0 and .255 as usable addresses? Dan White (Oct 22)
- Re: Issues encountered with assigning .0 and .255 as usable addresses? Job Snijders (Oct 22)
- Re: Issues encountered with assigning .0 and .255 as usable addresses? Tore Anderson (Oct 23)
- RE: Issues encountered with assigning .0 and .255 as usable addresses? Darren O'Connor (Oct 23)
- Re: Issues encountered with assigning .0 and .255 as usable addresses? bmanning (Oct 24)
- Re: Issues encountered with assigning .0 and .255 as usable addresses? Tore Anderson (Oct 23)
- RE: Issues encountered with assigning .0 and .255 as usable addresses? David Hubbard (Oct 22)
- Re: Issues encountered with assigning .0 and .255 as usable addresses? Joe Greco (Oct 22)
- Re: Issues encountered with assigning .0 and .255 as usable addresses? Mark Andrews (Oct 22)
- Re: Issues encountered with assigning .0 and .255 as usable addresses? Joe Greco (Oct 22)
- Re: Issues encountered with assigning .0 and .255 as usable addresses? Mark Andrews (Oct 22)
- Re: Issues encountered with assigning .0 and .255 as usable addresses? Jimmy Hess (Oct 22)
- Issues encountered with assigning all ones IPv6 /64 address? (Was Re: Issues encountered with assigning .0 and .255 as usable addresses?) Andy Smith (Oct 23)
- Re: Issues encountered with assigning all ones IPv6 /64 address? (Was Re: Issues encountered with assigning .0 and .255 as usable addresses?) Rob Laidlaw (Oct 23)
- Re: Issues encountered with assigning all ones IPv6 /64 address? (Was Re: Issues encountered with assigning .0 and .255 as usable addresses?) Sander Steffann (Oct 23)
- Re: Issues encountered with assigning all ones IPv6 /64 address? (Was Re: Issues encountered with assigning .0 and .255 as usable addresses?) Andy Smith (Oct 23)
- Re: Issues encountered with assigning all ones IPv6 /64 address? (Was Re: Issues encountered with assigning .0 and .255 as usable addresses?) Mike Jones (Oct 23)
- Re: Issues encountered with assigning all ones IPv6 /64 address? (Was Re: Issues encountered with assigning .0 and .255 as usable addresses?) Marc Storck (Oct 23)
- Re: Issues encountered with assigning all ones IPv6 /64 address? (Was Re: Issues encountered with assigning .0 and .255 as usable addresses?) Joel Maslak (Oct 23)
- Re: Issues encountered with assigning all ones IPv6 /64 address? (Was Re: Issues encountered with assigning .0 and .255 as usable addresses?) Rob Laidlaw (Oct 23)