Strange static route
deleskie at gmail.com
Sat Sep 24 01:57:09 UTC 2011
Wouldn't it make more sense to filter in bound default? or use a single
static default if you where worried about that?
On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 10:18 PM, Joel Maslak <jmaslak at antelope.net> wrote:
> 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
> 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
> > 188.8.131.52/1 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
More information about the NANOG