RE: Stupid Question maybe?

[Philip Loenneker <Philip.Loenneker () tasmanet com au>]

I had a heck of a time a few years back trying to troubleshoot an issue where an upstream provider had an ACL with an 
incorrect mask along the lines of 255.252.255.0. That was really interesting to talk about once we discovered it, 
though it caused some loss of hair beforehand...

-----Original Message-----
From: NANOG <nanog-bounces+philip.loenneker=tasmanet.com.au () nanog org> On Behalf Of Grant Taylor via NANOG
Sent: Wednesday, 19 December 2018 10:27 AM
To: nanog () nanog org
Subject: Re: Stupid Question maybe?

On 12/18/2018 03:12 PM, David Edelman wrote:
> I seem to remember that before the advent of VLSM and CIDR there was 
> no requirement for the 1 bits in the netmask to be contiguous with no 
> intervening 0 bits and there was always someone who tested it out on a 
> production network just to prove a point (usually only once)

I would love to hear some confirmation of this, or even first hand 
experience.

/Mainly/ for historical / trivial purposes.  (Don't ask, don't tell.)



-- 
Grant. . . .
unix || die