Static Routing 172.16.0.0/32
job at instituut.net
Fri Dec 8 22:47:09 CST 2017
On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 10:44 PM, Ken Chase <math at sizone.org> wrote:
> why not use 192.0.2.0/24 addrs?
> lots of other ranges you could probably use safely.
> Using .0 you're asking to exercise bugs and undefined implimentation choices
> of various tcp stacks and resolvers out there on myriad devices. Clever collision
> avoidance, but relies on a prayer.
Please stop spreading Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt about valid CIDR
> (IIRC try setting an NS record to resolve to 127.0.0.255 on windows 95 - it
> used to lock the OS up.... fun times. Someone had pointed some popular domain
> at us by accident, and having no entry and no negative caching of the day
> meant we were being hammerred on our 10mbps uplink, had to set something to
> get cached, so we did... several hours later a microsoft engineer called us
> and pleaded with us to use a different IP. :)
Microsoft ended support for Windows 95 on December 31th 2001....
More information about the NANOG