|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2012 15:17:07 -0400 (EDT) From: Jon Lewis <jlewis@lewis.org> To: Ray Soucy <rps@maine.edu> In-Reply-To: <CALFTrnMoHDddj0zpW7or2eCjgNctOSSrRo8VCGXi_686nAebcg@mail.gmail.com> Cc: nanog@nanog.org Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org On Thu, 23 Aug 2012, Ray Soucy wrote: > Funny, > > Saw this post come through this morning; then got call today for ASA > configuration help ... I noticed the guy had configured his ASA to use > "private" networks of 172.100.0.0/24 and 172.200.0.0/24 ... I reminded > him that they don't fall within RFC1918 but the response was "oh well, > I don't care" > > I don't think AT&T will have much luck with that space if this is > typical (something tells me it is). I wonder how AOL does with it. It's typical...but not contained within the "looks sort of like 1918 space" networks. Do enough network support and you'll run into similar stuff from time to time. Fortunately, the damage is limited to the idiots using IPs picked from their (or worse, they're overpaid/underqualified consultants) asses not being able to reach the actual assignees of those spaces. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Jon Lewis, MCP :) | I route Senior Network Engineer | therefore you are Atlantic Net | _________ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |