And thank god for that. Since Microsoft stopped diddle-farting with Windows 98 is was never infested with the UDP "Execute Payload with NT AUTHORITY\SYSTEM" flag that appeared in all later versions of Windows TCP/IP stack. As Windows 98 worked on the day after Microsoft stopped diddling with it, so it will work on that day + N, for every value of N. The most wonderful thing that can happen to a Microsoft product is that they stop diddling with it for at that point it stops being a moving target that works differently from one minute to the next. Additionally, features cannot be removed from the product as usually happens with each downgrade (I think Microsoft calls them upgrades) of the products. --- The fact that there's a Highway to Hell but only a Stairway to Heaven says a lot about anticipated traffic volume.
-----Original Message----- From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Job Snijders Sent: Friday, 8 December, 2017 15:47 To: Ken Chase Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Static Routing 172.16.0.0/32
On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 10:44 PM, Ken Chase <math@sizone.org> wrote:
why not use 192.0.2.0/24 addrs?
lots of other ranges you could probably use safely.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reserved_IP_addresses
Using .0 you're asking to exercise bugs and undefined implimentation choices of various tcp stacks and resolvers out there on myriad devices. Clever collision avoidance, but relies on a prayer.
Please stop spreading Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt about valid CIDR addresses. :-)
(IIRC try setting an NS record to resolve to 127.0.0.255 on windows 95 - it used to lock the OS up.... fun times. Someone had pointed some popular domain at us by accident, and having no entry and no negative caching of the day meant we were being hammerred on our 10mbps uplink, had to set something to get cached, so we did... several hours later a microsoft engineer called us and pleaded with us to use a different IP. :)
Microsoft ended support for Windows 95 on December 31th 2001....
Kind regards,
Job