From: "Toke Høiland-Jørgensen" <toke@redhat.com>
To: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 1/1] Allow 0.0.0.0/8 as a valid address range
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2019 18:52:52 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87zhmlctqz.fsf@toke.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1560442237-6336-2-git-send-email-dave.taht@gmail.com>
Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> writes:
> The longstanding prohibition against using 0.0.0.0/8 dates back
> to two issues with the early internet.
>
> There was an interoperability problem with BSD 4.2 in 1984, fixed in
> BSD 4.3 in 1986. BSD 4.2 has long since been retired.
>
> Secondly, addresses of the form 0.x.y.z were initially defined only as
> a source address in an ICMP datagram, indicating "node number x.y.z on
> this IPv4 network", by nodes that know their address on their local
> network, but do not yet know their network prefix, in RFC0792 (page
> 19). This usage of 0.x.y.z was later repealed in RFC1122 (section
> 3.2.2.7), because the original ICMP-based mechanism for learning the
> network prefix was unworkable on many networks such as Ethernet (which
> have longer addresses that would not fit into the 24 "node number"
> bits). Modern networks use reverse ARP (RFC0903) or BOOTP (RFC0951)
> or DHCP (RFC2131) to find their full 32-bit address and CIDR netmask
> (and other parameters such as default gateways). 0.x.y.z has had
> 16,777,215 addresses in 0.0.0.0/8 space left unused and reserved for
> future use, since 1989.
>
> This patch allows for these 16m new IPv4 addresses to appear within
> a box or on the wire. Layer 2 switches don't care.
>
> 0.0.0.0/32 is still prohibited, of course.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
Well, I see no reason why we shouldn't allow this.
Acked-by: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@redhat.com>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-06-13 16:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-06-13 16:10 [RFC PATCH net-next 0/1] Allow 0.0.0.0/8 as a valid address range Dave Taht
2019-06-13 16:10 ` [RFC PATCH net-next 1/1] " Dave Taht
2019-06-13 16:52 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87zhmlctqz.fsf@toke.dk \
--to=toke@redhat.com \
--cc=dave.taht@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.