Peter Rathlev wrote on 20/07/2010 02:02:
On Tue, 2010-07-20 at 01:46 +0300, Tassos Chatzithomaoglou wrote:
We're thinking of using the following as a dsl pool:
ip local pool test-pool 192.168.0.0 192.168.255.255
which means 192.168.x.0 and 192.168.x.255 will be given as ip
addresses to hosts (CPEs and PCs).
Has anyone met any issues with .0 and .255 as host addresses?
We have used /23 and larger DHCP pools and have never had any problems
with addresses ending in .0 and .255.
I could imagine one or two retarded (personal) firewalls that would balk
at those, but I don't think anything mainstream does.
Are they for PtP links? Where on the PC would the address be used, i.e.
what interface?
The PPPoE client on the PC would use it. The router will use unnumbered
loopback0 under the users' virtual-template with a completely different
/32 address.
--
Tassos
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
