nanog mailing list archives
Re: Using x.x.x.0 and x.x.x.255 host addresses in supernets.
From: "Scott Weeks" <surfer () mauigateway com>
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 17:35:30 -0800
--- rs () seastrom com wrote: "Wayne E. Bouchard" <web () typo org> writes:
So my oppinion is don't hesistate to use it until you find a real, reproducible problem.
Tell that to your call center manager. :-) ------------------------------------------ I've been using them for several years and no problems. We assign about a /15s worth of DHCP in /23s and use the middle .255 and .0 with zero calls of trouble. The first and last .0 and .255 in the /23 aren't used due to DHCP software silliness. scott
Current thread:
- Re: Using x.x.x.0 and x.x.x.255 host addresses in supernets., (continued)
- Re: Using x.x.x.0 and x.x.x.255 host addresses in supernets. Jon Lewis (Jan 08)
- Re: Using x.x.x.0 and x.x.x.255 host addresses in supernets. Joe Provo (Jan 08)
- Re: Using x.x.x.0 and x.x.x.255 host addresses in supernets. Jon Lewis (Jan 08)
- Re: Using x.x.x.0 and x.x.x.255 host addresses in supernets. Robert E. Seastrom (Jan 08)
- Re: Using x.x.x.0 and x.x.x.255 host addresses in supernets. JAKO Andras (Jan 08)
- Re: Using x.x.x.0 and x.x.x.255 host addresses in supernets. Jon Lewis (Jan 08)
- Re: Using x.x.x.0 and x.x.x.255 host addresses in supernets. Robert E. Seastrom (Jan 08)
- RE: Using x.x.x.0 and x.x.x.255 host addresses in supernets. David Schwartz (Jan 08)
- Re: Using x.x.x.0 and x.x.x.255 host addresses in supernets. James R. Cutler (Jan 08)
- Re: Using x.x.x.0 and x.x.x.255 host addresses in supernets. Robert E. Seastrom (Jan 09)