[Bug 235927] FreeBSD does not reply to ICMP requests when assigned an ip in 240.0.0.0/8

[bugzilla-noreply at freebsd.org]

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235927

--- Comment #7 from Rodney W. Grimes <rgrimes at FreeBSD.org> ---
(In reply to Loganaden Velvindron from comment #6)

>Linux has already accepted a patch to allow assignment of 240.0.0.0/4:
>https://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg540240.html
This patch appears to fix very ancient code that still treated this
as part of the multicast space.  The patches also add use of language
(ClassE) that was obsoleted 16 years ago.  
https://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg539064.html is the correct
reference to the message with the patch in it.

>OpenWRT (major third party firmware) has accepted a similar patch:
This is inline with what your asking for here.

>A new ID will be submitted to the IETF soon.
A new ID for what? Do you mean removing this from IANA reserved?

>Please note that there were some attempts in the past in the IETF already:
>https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-fuller-240space-02
A 2007 attempt by Cisco, have you considered contact them about moving forward
with that draft?

As it stands today the RFC say this is an invalid source address, so we should
continue to respect those standards in a standard released product, however I
would not have a problem with #ifdef FOO_EXPERMINTAL disabling these
restrictions, or a sysctl that did it.

There are some much larger obsticles to getting this working on the internet at
a larger scale, in that there are far too many firewalls that filter this
range, and getting it out of them is going to take a long time.  That time wont
even start until they are reclassed by IANA with an update to RFC6890 and you
would probably best get that done as it is the long lead show stopper to this
idea.  Getting FreeBSD, Linux and such fixed is pointless if people are going
to continue to firewall this range.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.