This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
.255 and .0 addresses
- Previous message (by thread): .255 and .0 addresses
- Next message (by thread): .255 and .0 addresses
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Jon Lawrence
jon at lawrence.org.uk
Sun Sep 12 21:14:43 CEST 2004
On Sunday 12 September 2004 18:05, Volodymyr Yakovenko wrote: > Dear Colleagues, > > I am trying to push one BIG telecom equipment vendor TAC to consider wrong > situation with assignment of IP addresses like xxx.xxx.xxx.0 and > xxx.xxx.xxx.255 from dynamic IP pools bigger than or equal to /24. > > Quick googling has not shown any STD or BCP documents, which could be used > as reference, but has shown number of pages, saying something like "do not > use .0 or .255 addresses, it could cause problems". > Without doubt, the pools must be bigger than /24 in order for .0 or .255 to be used as host addresses. Never tried it personally, but I can see no reason why .0.255 or .1.0 wouldn't be usable in a .0.0/23 - obviously assuming that you pass /23 to the hosts as a netmask. Jon
- Previous message (by thread): .255 and .0 addresses
- Next message (by thread): .255 and .0 addresses
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]