nanog mailing list archives
Re: 109/8 - not a BOGON
From: Matthew Palmer <mpalmer () hezmatt org>
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 21:31:59 +1100
On Fri, Oct 09, 2009 at 12:22:01PM +0100, Matthew Walster wrote:
A customer of mine is reporting that there are a large number of addresses he can not reach with his addresses in the 109/8 range. This was declassified as a BOGON and assigned by IANA to RIPE in January 2009. If you have a manually updated BOGON list, can I please ask that you review it and update it as soon as possible please? His addresses in 89/8 and 83/8 work just fine, hence this presumption of BOGON filtering.
A pingable address in the problem range would help people to quickly evaluate whether they have a problem in their network or upstreams... - Matt
Current thread:
- 109/8 - not a BOGON Matthew Walster (Oct 09)
- Re: 109/8 - not a BOGON Shane Short (Oct 09)
- RE: 109/8 - not a BOGON John Stuppi (jstuppi) (Oct 09)
- Re: 109/8 - not a BOGON Leo Vegoda (Oct 09)
- Re: 109/8 - not a BOGON Matthew Palmer (Oct 10)
- Re: 109/8 - not a BOGON Matthew Walster (Oct 20)
- Re: 109/8 - not a BOGON Shane Short (Oct 20)
- Re: 109/8 - not a BOGON Tim Wilde (Oct 20)
- Re: 109/8 - not a BOGON Matthew Walster (Oct 20)