From: Howard C. Berkowitz (hcb@gettcomm.com)
Date: Fri Jul 02 2004 - 16:26:06 GMT-3
At 3:14 PM -0400 7/2/04, Scott Morris wrote:
>He didn't ask which were bogons, but which were valid! :)
Ah, Grasshopper, in the virtual public network that is the Internet,
is bogonosity real?
Seriously, while I suspect Cisco prevents it being coded, and RFC
1812 says nto to use it, I wouldn't be surprised if the router can
actually forward on 0/8. I don't have a Zebra or BGPsim box handy,
but if I advertised a route in 0/8, I wouldn't be at all surprised if
it got into the routing table. Processing in the fast path is such a
critical resource that I can't see checking for 0/8, and I wouldn't
be surprised if the routing table installation task doesn't check for
it.
If one really wants to get historical, 0/8 was once the equivalent
(RFC 760, before even basic classes in RFC 791) of private address
space.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
>Howard C. Berkowitz
>Sent: Friday, July 02, 2004 2:07 PM
>To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
>Subject: Re: Quiz question of the day 20040702 (this one's for you Jamie!)
>
>At 1:58 PM -0400 7/2/04, Kenneth Wygand wrote:
>>Quiz question for the day:
>>
>>How many of the following are possible valid, addressable IPv4 addresses:
>>
>>1.1.1.1
>>0.45.34.23
>>1.0.0.0
>>1.255.255.0
>>1.0.0.255
>>255.223.234.24
>>10.255.255.255
>>
>>Good luck to all!
>>Ken
>
>Some of these clearly won't work. My question is whether you consider
>"IANA-reserved", but semantically valid addresses, to be valid with respect
>to your quiz.
>
>_______________________________________________________________________
>Please help support GroupStudy by purchasing your study materials from:
>http://shop.groupstudy.com
>
>Subscription information may be found at:
>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Aug 01 2004 - 10:11:45 GMT-3