| |||||||||||||
Sendmail X.0.0.0.0 releasedSendmail X.0.0.0.0 releasedPosted Nov 2, 2005 4:57 UTC (Wed) by jd (guest, #26381)In reply to: Sendmail X.0.0.0.0 released by fjf33 Parent article: Sendmail X.0.0.0.0 released
Derpends on whether it's the address or the netmask. The broadcast address
(Log in to post comments)
Sendmail X.0.0.0.0 released Posted Nov 2, 2005 6:05 UTC (Wed) by rise (guest, #5045) [Link] Yes, in fact I believe the all-zeroes host portion as broadcast was a mistaken BSDism that was soon corrected, but had already poisoned the usage enough that every since you haven't been able to rely on it for a host. It's annoying when you've got a /28 or /29 block to lose that ip as well as the broadcast and one for the gateway/router.
Sendmail X.0.0.0.0 released Posted Nov 2, 2005 8:27 UTC (Wed) by gavino (guest, #16214) [Link] The sooner we all use IPv6, the sooner this point will be moot.
/me laments the slow introduction of IPv6, whilst cursing the sorry hack that is IPv4 port address translation (aka port-based multiplexing, masquerading, IP overloading..) Regular (static/1:1) NAT still has its good uses though...
Sendmail X.0.0.0.0 released Posted Nov 3, 2005 10:07 UTC (Thu) by ekj (guest, #1524) [Link] The sooner we all use IPv6, the sooner this point will be moot.Will we get Sendmail X::0 then ?
|
|||||||||||||