Dan Kegel (dank@alumni.caltech.edu) writes:
> Ed Carp wrote:
> >
> > Dan Kegel (dank@alumni.caltech.edu) writes:
> >
> > > In http://www.kegel.com/mediaone.html I relate my problems when
> > > I was assigned an address ending in .0 or .255. Even though this
> > > was a valid address, some routers out on the internet blocked
> > > access, assuming packets from my address were forged as part
> > > of a smurf attack.
> >
> > No, sir, those addresses are not valid addresses, since most if not all hosts
> > may respond to them. Witness what happens when you ping an address ending in
> > either .0 or .255 - they are usually interpreted as broadcast addresses, NOT
> > to be assigned to hosts.
>
> In class B network, is it truly illegal to hand out addresses ending in
> .0 or .255? Disallowing this makes you waste almost 1% of your address space.
>
> Not that I think those addresses should be used... it's not practical,
> given that they look too much like class C network or broadcast addresses.
I'm not sure about a class B network - but every book I've ever read about
network administration says to *not* give out those addresses. I found out
myself the hard way on a Sun network, when I tried to ping 192.168.1.255, and
*everyone* on the network responded to the ping.
-- Ed Carp, N7EKG erc@pobox.com 940/367-2744 cell phone http://www.pobox.com/~erc- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue May 23 2000 - 21:00:10 EST