Ignoring bogus route 240.0.0.0/4

[Alexander Demenshin]

On 2017-09-20 01:12, Jonathan Stewart wrote:

> I'd say their behaviour is undefined--do routers just use them like
> unicast addresses?

Exactly - at least cisco & linux (the primary reason why I wanted to 
blackhole it).

> There are lists and documents about special-purpose IPv4 addresses. In
> fact, the IANA keeps a list of them:
> https://www.iana.org/assignments/iana-ipv4-special-registry/iana-ipv4-special-registry.xhtml
> [2]

If everything that is marked as "non-forwardable" is "bogus", then 
handling is inconsistent,
as networks like 198.51.100.0/24 ("documentation" and 
"forwardable=false") is perfectly
accepted.

> I'd say BIRD should generally follow RFCs and object to using
> addresses contrary to their standard meaning.

"Reserved" has no "standard meaning" - it may change any time, that's 
why I believe that
hardcoding is bad idea.

Not that this issue makes me cry, but anyway :)

Best regards,
Alexander.