nanog mailing list archives
Re: Static Routing 172.16.0.0/32
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike () swm pp se>
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2017 20:16:21 +0100 (CET)
On Fri, 8 Dec 2017, Ryan Hamel wrote:
Greetings, A colleague of mine has static routed 172.16.0.0/32 to a usable IP address, to have a single known IP address be static routed to a regions closest server. While I understand the IP address does work (pings and what not), I don't feel this should be the proper IP address used, but something more feasible like a usable IP in a dedicated range (172.31.0.0/24 for example).I would to hear everyone's thoughts on this, as this the first IP address in an RFC1918 range.
Last time I tried using the first address of a classful address block (which 172.16.0.0/32 would be) in Cisco IOS (classic), that didn't work properly. This was in IOS 12.0.x. You can't set up BGP peers to something in the network address in classful network space, for instance. So 172.16.0.0/32 or 172.16.255.255/32 wouldn't work (because it's first and last address of class B space), but 172.16.1.0 worked just fine (because in class B space, 172.16.1.0 isn't special).
So while this has been allowed per standardssince mid 90:ties, it's not obvious that it'll work in all operating systems that might still be in use.
-- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike () swm pp se
Current thread:
- Static Routing 172.16.0.0/32 Ryan Hamel (Dec 08)
- Re: Static Routing 172.16.0.0/32 Hunter Fuller (Dec 08)
- Re: Static Routing 172.16.0.0/32 Job Snijders (Dec 08)
- Re: Static Routing 172.16.0.0/32 Christopher Morrow (Dec 08)
- Re: Static Routing 172.16.0.0/32 Job Snijders (Dec 08)
- Re: Static Routing 172.16.0.0/32 Radu-Adrian Feurdean (Dec 15)
- Re: Static Routing 172.16.0.0/32 Job Snijders (Dec 08)
- Re: Static Routing 172.16.0.0/32 Jason Kuehl (Dec 08)
- Re: Static Routing 172.16.0.0/32 Hunter Fuller (Dec 08)
- Re: Static Routing 172.16.0.0/32 valdis . kletnieks (Dec 08)
- Re: Static Routing 172.16.0.0/32 William Herrin (Dec 08)
- Re: Static Routing 172.16.0.0/32 Mikael Abrahamsson (Dec 10)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Static Routing 172.16.0.0/32 Ryan Hamel (Dec 08)
- Re: Static Routing 172.16.0.0/32 William Herrin (Dec 08)
- Re: Static Routing 172.16.0.0/32 Ryan Hamel (Dec 08)
- Re: Static Routing 172.16.0.0/32 William Herrin (Dec 08)
- Re: Static Routing 172.16.0.0/32 Ken Chase (Dec 08)
- Re: Static Routing 172.16.0.0/32 Job Snijders (Dec 08)
- Re: Static Routing 172.16.0.0/32 Ken Chase (Dec 08)
- RE: Static Routing 172.16.0.0/32 Kate Gerry (Dec 08)
- RE: Static Routing 172.16.0.0/32 Keith Medcalf (Dec 08)
- Re: Static Routing 172.16.0.0/32 William Herrin (Dec 08)