12-22-2010 04:26 AM - edited 03-04-2019 10:51 AM
What are the possible effects of assigning an invalid address like 172.22.0.0 255.255.255.252 to a router interface. The 1841 router accepted the address. Thanks.
Solved! Go to Solution.
12-22-2010 04:35 AM
And why that should be an invalid address in your opinion ?
12-22-2010 04:35 AM
And why that should be an invalid address in your opinion ?
12-22-2010 04:50 AM
172.22.0.9 255.255.255.252 should only support 2 addresses i.e: 172.22.0.1 - 172.22.0.2.
12-22-2010 04:54 AM
ayo_adesanya wrote:
172.22.0.9 255.255.255.252 should only support 2 addresses i.e: 172.22.0.1 - 172.22.0.2.
I recommend that you go back at studying addresses and netmasks ...
12-22-2010 04:58 AM
I actually meant to write 172.22.0.0 with mask 255.255.255.252. Thanks
12-22-2010 04:57 AM
Hello ,
172.22.0.9 255.255.255.252 is a valid address also 172.22.0.10
the network address is 172.22.0.8 and the broadcast is 172.22.0.11
Dan
12-22-2010 05:01 AM
My mistake. I meant 172.22.0.0 255.255.255.252.
12-22-2010 04:37 AM
There is nothing wrong with this IP address. With this mask the IP address is part of a subnet of 4 addresses. 172.22.0.8 - 172.22.0.11 where 172.22.0.8 is the network address and 172.22.0.11 is the broadcast address and are thus not useable. If you connect a PC and give it IP address 172.22.0.10 you should be able to ping 172.22.0.9 successfully.
12-22-2010 04:55 AM
My mistake. I meant 172.22.0.0 which should support 172.22.0.1 - 172.22.0.2 ordinarily. But 172.22.0.9 was assigned to a router interface. It accepted the address and appears to be okay but since 172.22.0.0.255.255.255.252 should be limited to 172.22.0.1 - 172.22.0.2, could assigning 172.22.0.9 have an effect? I think it should but I've not noticed any direct effect. Also I have ocassional performance issues with the router and I'm wondering if this could be the cause.
Thanks for your time.
12-22-2010 04:59 AM
My mistake. I meant 172.22.0.0 which should support 172.22.0.1 - 172.22.0.2 ordinarily. But 172.22.0.9 was assigned to a router interface. It accepted the address and appears to be okay but since 172.22.0.0.255.255.255.252 should be limited to 172.22.0.1 - 172.22.0.2, could assigning 172.22.0.9 have an effect? I think it should but I've not noticed any direct effect. Also I have ocassional performance issues with the router and I'm wondering if this could be the cause.
Thanks for your time.
12-22-2010 05:36 AM
That is made to support /31 masks, and save addresses. It's ok to do that if you want.
12-22-2010 04:37 AM
Hi,
depends, but e.g if you are using routing protocols like OSPF or EIGRP then you could lose adjacency.
what is your topology?
Regards.
alain.
12-22-2010 05:04 AM
Could you be a little bit clearer please
Thanks.
Regards.
Alain.
Discover and save your favorite ideas. Come back to expert answers, step-by-step guides, recent topics, and more.
New here? Get started with these tips. How to use Community New member guide