nanog mailing list archives

Re: Static Routing 172.16.0.0/32


From: valdis.kletnieks () vt edu
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2017 15:09:49 -0500

On Fri, 08 Dec 2017 03:13:57 +0000, Ryan Hamel said:
Greetings,

A colleague of mine has static routed 172.16.0.0/32 to a usable IP address,
to have a single known IP address be static routed to a regions closest server.
While I understand the IP address does work (pings and what not), I don't feel
this should be the proper IP address used, but something more feasible like a
usable IP in a dedicated range (172.31.0.0/24 for example).

Probably depends on what your colleague is trying to do.  Nothing in the
rules says the .0 address on a subnet is reserved (though you're in for a
surprise if there's any gear still on the net with a 4.2BSD stack).

I would to hear everyone's thoughts on this, as this the first IP address in
an RFC1918 range.

At some point, some chucklehead  is going to look at that .0.0 and mentally think /16,
and things will go pear-shaped pretty quickly....

Attachment: _bin
Description:


Current thread: