Then how do you effectivly protect your networks form being used as amplifiers? Does no ip directed broadcast really work? On Tue, 14 Apr 1998, Charley Kline wrote: :> No, IMHO, the comment stands: no matter _what_ size your network is, if :> you assign host addresses with a .0 or .255 final octet, things may :> break, and you deserve what you get. : :> Again, the likelihood that these addresses will cause problems or :> experience connectivity issues is a far greater concern than the gain of :> less than 1% of usable address space. : : :What bullshit. Am I hearing people advocating deliberately breaking :perfectly valid addresses in order to not have to tax our poor brains :for a proper solution? : :Filtering out all x.x.x.255 addresses is a very bad idea. It's a :quick-and-dirty, poorly-thought-out hack. There are lots of .0 and .255 :addresses in use in variously sized net blocks. We don't get to simply :say "well too bad." Especially coming from the same people who advocated :classless addressing to begin with. The byte boundaries are meaningless. :We all said so. : :Dissapointed, : :/cvk : -- Regards, Jason A. Lixfeld jlixfeld@idirect.ca iDirect Network Operations jlixfeld@torontointernetxchange.net --------------------------------------------------------------------- TUCOWS Interactive Ltd. o/a | "A Different Kind of Internet Company" Internet Direct Canada Inc. | "FREE BANDWIDTH for Toronto Area IAPs" 5415 Dundas Street West | http://www.torontointernetxchange.net Suite 301, Toronto Ontario | (416) 236-5806 (T) M9B-1B5 CANADA | (416) 236-5804 (F) ---------------------------------------------------------------------