Re: Strange static route

[jim deleskie <deleskie () gmail com>]

Wouldn't it make more sense to filter in bound default?  or use a single
static default if you where worried about that?

-jim

On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 10:18 PM, Joel Maslak <jmaslak () antelope net> wrote:

> Protection against learning a bad default route through whatever routing
> protocol they are learning, since these two routes would be more specific
> than any typical default route.  They probably got burned learning a default
> route.
>
> On Sep 23, 2011, at 7:12 PM, Glen Kent <glen.kent () gmail com> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have seen a few operators adding static routes like:
> > 0.0.0.0/1 some next-hop and
> > 128.0.0.0/1 some next-hop.
> >
> > Why would anyone want to add such static routes? What does 0.0.0.0/1
> > mean. Note that the netmask is 1 and not 0.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Glen