On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Job Snijders <j...@instituut.net> wrote:
> Nothing wrong with using xxx.0 or xxx::0 in the context of a host route > (/32 or /128). > note that in times past (perhaps even now marked historical) there were platforms which got unhappy with network/broadcast addresses being used as host addresses... At least some windows platforms balked at .0 or .255 host addresses (even if that address was 'off-net' from them). maybe this is all history though :)
