[56604] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Issue with 208.192.0.0/8 - 208.196.93.0/24?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (chuck goolsbee)
Tue Mar 11 09:36:57 2003
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10303110847470.27828-100000@s1.yuriev.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 06:34:45 -0800
To: nanog@merit.edu
From: chuck goolsbee <chucklist@forest.net>
Cc: alex@yuriev.com, "McBurnett, Jim" <jmcburnett@msmgmt.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
>Brilliant. Why did not you try "telnet <target.ip> 80"?
>
>Just because random packets spewed by traceroute are dropped on the floor
>does not mean that the site is dead.
As I stated to many in off-list mail last night, we were unable to
get to that IP on any port. It was not just traceroute. My original
email was indeed lacking in regard to suggesting cluefullness on my
part. No need to beat on others because *I* tempted them into looking
less than brilliant by not providing enough original info.
The issue was sorted out after some offlist communication... once
relevant info was communicated. Clients are happy and making
transactions again just fine.
My apologies again for any misunderstanding.
Thanks again to those that helped out.
--chuck
I'm stapling this to a 2x4 and administering it to my forehead to
remind me about proper communication with this group:
--
________________________________________________________________________
traceroute is a disconcertingly blunt hammer; that we continue to use it
to essentially nail moving jello to a wall says more about us than about
anything on the Internet. --k claffy, At 8:43 -0700 10/17/02 on NANOG
