[172069] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv6 at 50% for VZW (Re: NAT IP and Google)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Julien Goodwin)
Fri May 23 01:26:11 2014
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Fri, 23 May 2014 15:24:08 +1000
From: Julien Goodwin <nanog@studio442.com.au>
To: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <CD360C35-B9C5-4C36-8390-9B36B0B83090@puck.nether.net>
Reply-To: jgoodwin@studio442.com.au
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 23/05/14 11:21, Jared Mauch wrote:
> You can't cater to everyones broken network. I can't reach 1.1.1.1 from here either, but sometimes when I travel I can, even with TTL=1. At some point folks have to fix what's broken.
1.1.1.1 is not private IP space.
BGP routing table entry for 1.1.1.0/24
Paths: (2 available, best #1)
15169
AS-path translation: { Google }
edge5.Amsterdam1 (metric 20040)
Origin IGP, metric 100000, localpref 86, valid, internal, best
Community: Europe Lclprf_86 Netherlands Level3_Peer Amsterdam
Originator: edge5.Amsterdam1
15169
AS-path translation: { Google }
edge5.Amsterdam1 (metric 20040)
Origin IGP, metric 100000, localpref 86, valid, internal
Community: Europe Lclprf_86 Netherlands Level3_Peer Amsterdam
Originator: edge5.Amsterdam1
(Yes ok, it doesn't respond to any packets last I checked)
I just wish Cisco wouldn't document it as a great IP address to use for
your captive portal
