You’re using just the two middle IPs in the four that make up the /30 set,
right? IOW, the subnet x.x.x.0/30 should have .0 and .3 unused (they’re
broadcast), and you use .1 and .2.
-mel
> On Jun 25, 2019, at 9:41 AM, Scott wrote:
>
> First, sorry if this is a bit of a noob question.
>
> I'
Also, what do you mean by “join to /30 public subnets to a /29”? You can’t
overlap subnets, if that’s what you’re thinking.
-mel
> On Jun 25, 2019, at 3:27 PM, Mel Beckman wrote:
>
> You’re using just the two middle IPs in the four that make up the /30 set,
> right? IOW, the subnet x.x.x.0/3
No nothing like that. I'm just removing the .0/30 and 4/30 subnets and
adding .0/29.
To your previous question, yes .0 and .3 are unused. Once I change the
subnet .3 becomes a usable IP and it's getting hammered with traffic,
causing packet loss.
On 6/25/19 3:30 PM, Mel Beckman wrote:
> Also, wh
--- sc...@viviotech.net wrote:
From: Scott
To your previous question, yes .0 and .3 are
unused. Once I change the subnet .3 becomes a
usable IP and it's getting hammered with
traffic, causing packet loss.
--
Is it legitimate traffic or DDoS stuff?
scot
If the sources are from many different IPs, it could be a DDoS attack that you
simply didn’t notice before. You can black-hole individual IPs using a /32
null0 route. That will at least stop your border router from trying to ARP the
destination, reducing broadcast traffic on the subnet. In fact,
> Scott wrote :
> No nothing like that. I'm just removing the .0/30 and 4/30 subnets and adding
> .0/29.
> To your previous question, yes .0 and .3 are unused. Once I change the
> subnet .3
> becomes a usable IP and it's getting hammered with traffic, causing packet
> loss.
You change the sub
Michel is right. This is a common configuration error: failing to have the mask
agree on all interfaces. This is indeed what you would see.
-mel
On Jun 25, 2019, at 4:07 PM, Michel Py
mailto:michel...@tsisemi.com>> wrote:
> Scott wrote :
> No nothing like that. I'm just removing the .0/30 an
7 matches
Mail list logo