I'm just curious, was the ip in the RFC 1918 172.16.0.0/16 range? https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1918
On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 6:01 PM Mehmet Akcin <meh...@akcin.net> wrote: > To close the loop here (in case if someone has this type of issue in the > future), I have spoken to AT&T instead of trying to work it out with AWS > Hosted Vendor, Reolink. > > AT&T Changed my public IP, and now I am no longer in that 172.x.x.x block, > everything is working fine. > > mehmet > > On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 2:54 PM Javier J <jav...@advancedmachines.us> > wrote: > >> Auto generated VPC in AWS use RFC1819 addresses. This should not >> interfere with pub up space. >> >> What is the exact issue? If you can't ping something in AWS chances are >> it's a security group blocking you. >> >> >> >> On Tue, Oct 1, 2019, 7:00 PM Jim Popovitch via NANOG <nanog@nanog.org> >> wrote: >> >>> On October 1, 2019 9:39:03 PM UTC, Matt Palmer <mpal...@hezmatt.org> >>> wrote: >>> >On Tue, Oct 01, 2019 at 04:50:33AM -0400, Jim Popovitch via NANOG >>> >wrote: >>> >> On 10/1/2019 4:09 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote: >>> >> > possible that this is various AWS customers making >>> >iptables/firewall mistakes? >>> >> > "block that pesky rfc1918 172/12 space!!" >>> >> >>> >> AWS also uses some 172/12 space on their internal network (e.g. the >>> >network >>> >> that sits between EC2 instances and the AWS external firewalls) >>> > >>> >Does AWS use 172.0.0.0/12 internally, or 172.16.0.0/12? They're >>> >different >>> >things, after all. >>> > >>> >>> I don't know their entire operations, but they do use some 172.16.0.0/12 >>> addresses internally. And yes, that is very different than 172/12, sorry >>> for the confusion. >>> >>> -Jim P. >>> >>>