>> IMO anything that pretends to implement IPv4 but which doesn't do >> noncontiguous netasks is simply broken, I don't care whether it >> comes from Cisco or Netgear or NetBSD. > For that to work at all across multiple implementations would require > a standard to tell you, when your destination address matches more > than one route, which of those routes takes precedence.
That...disagrees with my experience. I ran my house LAN with a noncontiguous netmask for years without any such standard. Worked just fine. Perhaps you meant "to work consistently in certain cases" rather than "to work at all"? /~\ The ASCII Mouse \ / Ribbon Campaign X Against HTML [email protected] / \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
