Strange static route

Sat Sep 24 01:18:42 UTC 2011

Protection against learning a bad default route through whatever routing protocol they are learning, since these two routes would be more specific than any typical default route.  They probably got burned learning a default route.

On Sep 23, 2011, at 7:12 PM, Glen Kent <glen.kent at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I have seen a few operators adding static routes like:
> 0.0.0.0/1 some next-hop and
> 128.0.0.0/1 some next-hop.
> 
> Why would anyone want to add such static routes? What does 0.0.0.0/1
> mean. Note that the netmask is 1 and not 0.
> 
> Thanks,
> Glen
> 