Re: IPv6 at 50% for VZW (Re: NAT IP and Google)

[Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists () gmail com>]

On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 1:24 AM, Julien Goodwin <nanog () studio442 com au> wrote:
> 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)

<cough>some times it does</cough>
(some portion of the space does/service replies to a sample of packets...)

Geoff should have more info on the progress of his experiment though.

> I just wish Cisco wouldn't document it as a great IP address to use for
> your captive portal

yea.. 'document' ... I think 'hardcode' (or perhaps default-config) is
more like it, right?