What is the Relationship Among Different Versions of Softwares?

[lleachii]

@OugCPC

A. There were lists in two Topics (see below) on this Forum that mentioned the 240/4 netblock. Each also included the common private 10/8, 172.16/12, 192.168/16 plus others. My question is, does this mean the 240/4 is inherently included in the OpenWrt routable table, or can easily be set up under OpenWrt? And, where can either be confirmed in the OpenWrt documents?

https://forum.openwrt.org/t/solved-can-two-ipsets-be-used-in-a-single-rule/10954

Incorrect. I ran the following command prior to testing:

ipset del bogons 240.0.0.0/4

(this command has no bearing on success of the trace , nor OpenWrt's ability to route.)

This has no bearing on if it's routable, this was covered here, asked and answered, as I am the author of the statement you're referencing - WHICH YOU KNOW!::

Residential Gateway Using 240.0.0.0/4 NetBlock

I am OK with my posting. Indeed, see the reference, and again, the RFCs: Perhaps a language barrier. You seem to think you can file a RFC incompatible with others. I think you fail to realize: You can't refer to secret Linked in, emails, etc. to explain your technology You keep saying that there's some secret to how this works You therefore won't address limitations in the RFCs :

Why would the OpenWrt documents discuss a restricted address space!?!?

Why would an unused IP of any block be in any OpenWrt route table (or any router for that matter)?