On 1-okt-2007, at 5:50, Danny McPherson wrote:
At the present time, most IP implementation consider any IP
address
in the range 240.0.0.0 through 255.255.255.255 to be invalid as
the
source or destination of a datagram.
This is untrue. _Most_ implementations have no problem with it.
I'd be quite interested in any empirical evidence you might have
in support of this statement. Pointers welcome.
I've tested this with various BSD-derived implementations over the
years, and they don't remember any problems.
But (on my Mac):
$ sudo ifconfig lo0 alias 240.240.240.240/32
$ ping -c 3 240.240.240.240
PING 240.240.240.240 (240.240.240.240): 56 data bytes
^C
--- 240.240.240.240 ping statistics ---
3 packets transmitted, 0 packets received, 100% packet loss
$ ifconfig lo0
lo0: flags=8049<UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING,MULTICAST> mtu 16384
inet6 ::1 prefixlen 128
inet6 fe80::1%lo0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x1
inet 127.0.0.1 netmask 0xff000000
inet 240.240.240.240 netmask 0xffffffff
$ sudo ifconfig lo0 alias 1.240.240.240/32
$ ping -c 3 1.240.240.240
PING 1.240.240.240 (1.240.240.240): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 1.240.240.240: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=0.047 ms
So apparently you can configure a class E address but it doesn't work
even though a class A address under the same circumstances does work.
_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
