nanog mailing list archives
Re: content regulation, was Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality
From: Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2015 12:20:37 -0800
Not so sure about that… 240.59.103.76.in-addr.arpa. 7200 IN PTR c-76-103-59-240.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. is most definitely a business class service from Comcast. Seems to match the entry for 24.7.48.153 pretty closely. I think the difference is the type of cable network in the particular area. HFC is Hybrid Fiber Coax. The network in San Jose doesn’t really have any fiber, so it’s likely not an HFC network. I’m not sure what HSD stands for other than possibly “High Speed Data”, but I suspect it’s more likely some cable-specific term for an all-copper alternative to HFC. Owen
On Mar 2, 2015, at 03:39 , Rich Kulawiec <rsk () gsp org> wrote: On Sun, Mar 01, 2015 at 11:58:34AM -0500, Christopher Morrow wrote:business vs consumer edition products? (that'd be my bet)I think these are all residential customers, as business customers appear to use different subdomains and/or host naming conventions, e.g.: 24.7.48.153 c-24-7-48-153.hsd1.ca.comcast.net 24.10.217.142 c-24-10-217-142.hsd1.ut.comcast.net 24.129.85.220 c-24-129-85-220.hsd1.fl.comcast.net vs. 70.88.25.201 70-88-25-201-chesterfield-va.hfc.comcastbusiness.net 70.90.158.37 70-90-158-37-knoxville.hfc.comcastbusiness.net 70.91.133.105 70-91-133-105-ma-ne.hfc.comcastbusiness.net Or: 23.240.176.98 cpe-23-240-176-98.socal.res.rr.com 24.25.253.81 cpe-24-25-253-81.hawaii.res.rr.com 24.27.121.156 cpe-24-27-121-156.tx.res.rr.com vs. 24.106.98.106 rrcs-24-106-98-106.central.biz.rr.com 24.142.142.169 rrcs-24-142-142-169.central.biz.rr.com 24.173.100.134 rrcs-24-173-100-134.sw.biz.rr.com Those are all (very recent) direct-to-MX on port 25 spam sources, but it looks to me like the first group in each set is residential and the second group is business. But perhaps I'm misinterpreting the naming. ---rsk
Current thread:
- Re: content regulation, was Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Jimmy Hess (Feb 28)
- Re: content regulation, was Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality John R. Levine (Feb 28)
- Re: content regulation, was Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Rich Kulawiec (Mar 01)
- Re: content regulation, was Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Christopher Morrow (Mar 01)
- Re: content regulation, was Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Rich Kulawiec (Mar 02)
- Re: content regulation, was Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Livingood, Jason (Mar 02)
- Re: content regulation, was Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Owen DeLong (Mar 02)
- Re: content regulation, was Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Scott Helms (Mar 02)
- Re: content regulation, was Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Rich Kulawiec (Mar 01)
- Re: content regulation, was Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality John R. Levine (Feb 28)
- Re: content regulation, was Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality John Levine (Mar 01)
- Re: content regulation, was Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Christopher Morrow (Mar 01)
- Re: content regulation, was Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality John R. Levine (Mar 01)
- Re: content regulation, was Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Owen DeLong (Mar 01)
- Re: content regulation, was Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality John R. Levine (Mar 01)
- Re: content regulation, was Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Owen DeLong (Mar 01)
- Re: content regulation, was Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Dave Taht (Mar 01)
- Re: content regulation, was Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Stephen Satchell (Mar 01)
- Re: content regulation, was Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality John Levine (Mar 01)