Static Routing 172.16.0.0/32
kmedcalf at dessus.com
Sat Dec 9 01:23:31 CST 2017
And thank god for that. Since Microsoft stopped diddle-farting with Windows 98 is was never infested with the UDP "Execute Payload with NT AUTHORITY\SYSTEM" flag that appeared in all later versions of Windows TCP/IP stack.
As Windows 98 worked on the day after Microsoft stopped diddling with it, so it will work on that day + N, for every value of N.
The most wonderful thing that can happen to a Microsoft product is that they stop diddling with it for at that point it stops being a moving target that works differently from one minute to the next. Additionally, features cannot be removed from the product as usually happens with each downgrade (I think Microsoft calls them upgrades) of the products.
The fact that there's a Highway to Hell but only a Stairway to Heaven says a lot about anticipated traffic volume.
>From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces at nanog.org] On Behalf Of Job
>Sent: Friday, 8 December, 2017 15:47
>To: Ken Chase
>Cc: nanog at nanog.org
>Subject: Re: Static Routing 172.16.0.0/32
>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
>> of various tcp stacks and resolvers out there on myriad devices.
>> 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
>> at us by accident, and having no entry and no negative caching of
>> meant we were being hammerred on our 10mbps uplink, had to set
>> get cached, so we did... several hours later a microsoft engineer
>> and pleaded with us to use a different IP. :)
>Microsoft ended support for Windows 95 on December 31th 2001....
More information about the NANOG