On Sat, 24 May 2014 18:45:38 +0200 Pascal Hambourg <pas...@plouf.fr.eu.org> wrote:
> Reco a écrit : > > Pascal Hambourg <pas...@plouf.fr.eu.org> wrote: > > > >>> Reco <recovery...@gmail.com> writes: > >>> > >>>> /24 net allows 256 addresses. You've tried one (and is using another > >>>> one), so it's 254 to go. > >> Less. .0 and .255 are reserved as network and broadcast addresses. > > > > I seen ISPs that advertise routes ending with 0. A violation of certain > > RFC, I'm sure, but it did work. > > 1) A route is not an address. Indeed it is not. > 2) An address ending with 0 is not always a network address (and > conversely), depending on the prefix length. It is for /24. And you're correct here too. IIRC in one case they gave their customers /20 subnet with a default route ending with zero. Such 'network configuration' worked only with certain proprietary OS which had four-colored banner as a logotype. Suffice to say that on ISP level nobody cared about any other scenario of using their service. Reco -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140524211415.92dffdbe50fda435d432b...@gmail.com
