Mike Lewinski wrote:
David Hubbard wrote:
I remember back in the day of old hardware and operating
systems we'd intentionally avoid using .255 IP addresses
for anything even when the netmask on our side would have
made it fine, so I just thought I'd try it out for kicks
today. From two of four ISP's it worked fine, from Verizon
FIOS and Road Runner commercial, it didn't. So I guess
that old problem still lingers?
The TCP/IP stack in Windows XP is broken in this regard, possibly in
Vista as well, though I've yet to have the displeasure of finding out. I
have a router with a .255 loopback IP on it. My Windows XP hosts cannot
SSH to it. The specific error that Putty throws is "Network error:
Cannot assign requested address".
At least if I ever need to completely protect a device from access by
Windows users, I have a good option :)
Mike
We had to split our assigned ranges (PPP/PPPoE) into /24, even if it
were assigned to the (NAS, BRAS, etc) in larger chunks. It seems
customers who were assigned the .0/.255 could get out there - but
certain sites (IIS it seemed) would refuse to talk back.
I forget if I tested microsoft.com like this...
