nanog mailing list archives
Re: SMURF amplifier block list
From: sob () academ com (Stan Barber)
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 19:41:46 CDT
As far as .0 and .255 addresses go, I'm no more "asking for trouble" by using those than I'm asking for trouble by running an IRC server. They are completely valid addresses. Perhaps those making such comments are better at getting IP space than we are, but we need to squeeze every IP we possibly can into use just to provide enough addresses to our customers.
Actually, in the old classful days, you were probably asking for trouble to use those addresses. Today, when everyone is running fully classless IP stacks (everyone is doing that, right?), they should be usable. However, I'd personally avoid them for any host that might have to get regular access to other parts of the Internet (those parts that might still be running really old stacks). You can probably insure they will work inside your network, but you may not be able to guarantee they will work elsewhere. -- Stan | Academ Consulting Services |internet: sob () academ com Olan | For more info on academ, see this |uucp: mcsun!academ!sob Barber | URL- http://www.academ.com/academ |Opinions expressed are only mine.
Current thread:
- Re: SMURF amplifier block list, (continued)
- Re: SMURF amplifier block list barton (Apr 12)
- Re: SMURF amplifier block list Chris Liljenstolpe (Apr 13)
- Re: SMURF amplifier block list Vadim Antonov (Apr 13)
- Re: SMURF amplifier block list Hank Nussbacher (Apr 14)
- Re: SMURF amplifier block list Forrest W. Christian (Apr 14)
- Re: SMURF amplifier block list jlixfeld (Apr 17)
- Re: SMURF amplifier block list Dean Anderson (Apr 17)
- Re: SMURF amplifier block list Forrest W. Christian (Apr 14)
- Re: SMURF amplifier block list Hank Nussbacher (Apr 14)
- Re: SMURF amplifier block list Charley Kline (Apr 14)
- Re: SMURF amplifier block list Jeff Weisberg (Apr 14)
- Re: SMURF amplifier block list Stan Barber (Apr 14)
- SMURF amplifier block list Jaap Kreijkamp (Apr 29)