nanog mailing list archives

Re: Static Routing 172.16.0.0/32


From: Jason Kuehl <jason.w.kuehl () gmail com>
Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2017 15:00:40 -0500

+1 for gross comment.

On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 2:57 PM, Hunter Fuller <hf0002+nanog () uah edu> wrote:

I think I'd rate this one as "gross but technically not breaking any rules
I suppose." (I couldn't find any at first glance, anyway.)

On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 1:55 PM Ryan Hamel <Ryan.Hamel () quadranet com>
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.

Thanks,

--
Ryan Hamel
ryan.hamel () quadranet com | +1 (888) 578-2372 <(888)%20578-2372>
QuadraNet, Inc. | Dedicated Servers, Colocation, Cloud

--

--
Hunter Fuller
Network Engineer
VBH Annex B-5
+1 256 824 5331

Office of Information Technology
The University of Alabama in Huntsville
Systems and Infrastructure




-- 
Sincerely,

Jason W Kuehl
Cell 920-419-8983
jason.w.kuehl () gmail com


Current thread: