Re: Routing Questions: 1 Radius, 1 OSPF (fwd)

Randy Moore (ramoore@atlantech.net)
Sun, 10 Aug 1997 22:46:21 -0400

OK, I can and have setup my PM's to not use the first and last 32 IP
subnets for their dialup pools when using OSPF and trying to get the routes
distributed properly.

But why???

Can you give a mildly technical explaination as to why the .0 and .255
addresses are treated differently in the world of classless routing? How
are these different from .32 and .63 in a /27 block?

I'd like to understand these kinds of limits so that they don't bite me later.

Thanks.

At 10:18 AM 8/9/97 -0700, you wrote:
>Once upon a time John-David Childs shaped the electrons to say...
>>So, are you saying that it's OK to set-assigned to any subnet boundary IP
>>except .0???
>
>Well, and the last which would cause .255 to be issued at the end of the
>pool.
>
>>If I then set-assigned to X.X.X.1 with a pool-size of 32 (so "mandated"
>>(according to previous posts in this forum) in order to allow OSPF routes
>>to be broadcast as a single entry rather than multiple host routes), then
>
>No, that won't work. That's NOT an even subnet.
>
>You can't use the first and last subnets with a pools size of 32.
>
>>subnet boundary or the subnet boundary +1), the PM will at some point
>>assign an IP address which is the network/broadcast IP of the next/current
>
>That doesn't matter- you are not really subnetting. OSPF doesn't care.
>
>-MZ
>--
>Livingston Enterprises - Chair, Department of Interstitial Affairs
>Phone: 800-458-9966 510-737-2100 FAX: 510-737-2110 megazone@livingston.com
>For support requests: support@livingston.com <http://www.livingston.com/>
>Snail mail: 4464 Willow Road, Pleasanton, CA 94588
>
>
>

- Randy Moore
Atlantech Online, Inc.
(301) 593-2794
http://www.atlantech.net/