[8462] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: A Trojan Horse? Was: Russian chemists harmed by ANS-CIX dispute?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Andrew Partan)
Fri Nov 19 19:37:29 1993
From: asp@uunet.uu.net (Andrew Partan)
To: stpeters@dawn.crd.ge.com
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1993 19:36:45 -0500 (EST)
Cc: schoff@psi.com, com-priv@psi.com
In-Reply-To: <9311192021.AA00536@spare-parts.crd.Ge.Com> from "Dick St.Peters" at Nov 19, 93 03:21:25 pm
> The various recent reports of place A not being able to reach place B
> have left me with a growing sense of dismay. I have yet to find an
> IP address I cannot reach, other than those behind firewalls, and I
> have until now assumed that they could all reach each other too.
Then you have not tried looking very closely.
There are nets that are routed on the NSFNET/ANSnet.
There are nets that are routed on the CIX.
There are nets that are routed on neither.
These sets do not overlap 100%.
The last time that I checked, I found about 600 or so nets that
AlterNet had routes to that the NSFNET/ANSnet did not. Most of these,
but not all, were routed on the CIX. Of the remaining nets, most of
them were European, but I also found some nets from nearly every
provider that we (AlterNet) have a direct connection to.
An example is 192.31.50 (not to pick on BARRNet, its just the first net
that came to mind).
192.31.50 is not NSFNET routed and is not CIX routed. AlterNet and
BARRNet have routes to this net (this net happens to be in use for a
DMZ net between AlterNet, BARRNet, and DEC).
--asp@uunet.uu.net (Andrew Partan)
