On Fri, February 24, 2006 1:38 pm, Volker Kuhlmann wrote: >> Have any Paradisians tried nmapping ( even fingering! ) the box to >> attempt >> to ascertain what it may be?? > > No such luck: > > from inside: >> ping 172.20.18.55 > PING 172.20.18.55 (172.20.18.55) 56(84) bytes of data. > From 203.96.155.226: icmp_seq=1 Destination Host Unreachable > From 203.96.155.226 icmp_seq=1 Destination Host Unreachable > > from firewall: >> ping 172.20.18.55 > PING 172.20.18.55 (172.20.18.55) from 203.x.x.x : 56(84) bytes of data. > --- 172.20.18.55 ping statistics --- > 9 packets transmitted, 0 received, 100% loss, time 8000ms > > 172./ is a private address range which shouldn't be routed. It's also > not addressable as all the Paradise cable IPs are outside that range. I > didn't try nmap but the Paradise router at 203.x.x.1 should dump it. > > Btw this traffic is not charged for, as you can drill right down to the > IP number for each connection, and no 172. numbers show up. > > Volker > > -- > Volker Kuhlmann is possibly list0570 with the domain in > header > http://volker.dnsalias.net/ Please do not CC list postings to me. > > ...even with IPCop you can switch off responding to ICMP packets. It may be against the standards, but there are even a few SP's out there who do it. Doesn't mean it won't respond to an nmap -sO, -sS or -sU though.
Steve -- Let us have a moment of silence for all Americans who are now stuck in traffic on their way to a health club to ride a stationary bicycle. - Congressman Earl Blumenauer (Oregon)
