Message from @Bones
Discord ID: 495664087770988594
I'm like
the fuck do juggalos have to do with this
DHCP is standard for ISP's.
Not when they go from private ip to public ip
That doesn't matter for the DHCP configuration of the public interface on the home router.
NAT lies above the physical interface configuration.
Nat is layer 3, issue is at layer 2
Or at layer 1
I'd say the issue is at the DHCP server on the ISP side.
So how does a potential misconfig at L3 affect L2
Most likely
But isp playing me by saying they dont see an issue
The L3 misconfig is in the DHCP configuration being sent by the ISP's DHCP server.
But ip i recognize is fine, so even if the dhcp is misconfig, i got the right routing
This that misconfig is equivalent to spam log, since it does not affect routing
At least for me
I already asked this with the devs that made the router, i showed my routing, they concluded it is spam log sonce routing in routing table is fine
255.255.255.255/24 sounds like garbage sent by the DHCP server.
Ok, well, if the eth0 config actually shows valid address and network and broadcast for what I assume is an 82.x.x.x/24 address then it's the log message that's garbage.
I'm not esp knowledgeable with routing but I was under the impression broadcasting is handled by the router @ the local subnet. How would 255.255.255.255 be a misconfiguration if that address is supposed to be resolved to that subnets broadcast ip? Or do I just not know what I am talking about here
I'm probably wrong here, just curious and I studied a little bit of routing once upon a time
255.255.255.255 wouldn't occur anywhere in the IP config for an interface with a /24 adddress.
It would only occur in the routing table for a routing entry pointing to a specific host.
Are there any lines in the routing table with a mask of 255.255.255.255?
And with that my knowledge is exhausted. I was under the impression that addresses like 127.0.0.1 and 255.255.255.255 were treated as special addresses that were valid regardless of the mask
It depends
All i know is it doesnt matter when routing still gets the right ip
Probably true. Could even be that it is configured right and some error in the logic being used to validate the broadcast address is reporting some value wrong causing the log to show up incorrectly
either way, glad I don't work in routing <:moon2S:289036583209009152>
Most by the word >calculated
lmao ^
deus vult <:whiteknight:466048974131036181>
the meme is becoming reality
dont let your memes be dreams
Lol
Is it already time for another fucking crusade?
hmm
And a deus vult to you too. 🎅