0

From what I know, routers do not forward packets from/to address of the range 169.254.x.x That being said, after exchanging a router "tracert 169.254.0.1" did in fact find a route with 13 hops. I'm not sure what to make of this.

2
  • can you post the trace?
    – Ron Trunk
    Dec 14 '14 at 4:39
  • Did any answer help you? if so, you should accept the answer so that the question doesn't keep popping up forever, looking for an answer. Alternatively, you could provide and accept your own answer.
    – Ron Maupin
    Aug 11 '17 at 0:22
3

Your computer is missing a route for 169.254.0.0/16. It's a perfectly legal address range as far as routers are concerned. It's up to the host to define it as a link-local scope. (or the network admin to null route it, where appropriate.)

That said, a modern router should be aware of RFC3927, Section 2.7 and have 169.254/16 as a link-local subnet. Routers must drop any 169.254/16 destination. However, not all comply.

2
  • 1
    RE: "our computer is missing a route for 169.254.0.0/16". Not only that, RFC 3927, Section 2.6.2 is extremely clear on this point: The host MUST NOT send a packet with an IPv4 Link-Local destination address to any router for forwarding. The OP's host is broken to begin with. Dec 14 '14 at 6:33
  • For it to be recognized as link-local, it either has to be assigned to an interface, listed in the route table (what most OSes do), or be coded into the network stack (what routers are supposed to do.) If the system doesn't know it's link-local, then it will route it like anything else.
    – Ricky
    Dec 15 '14 at 1:58

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.