Le 04/01/2018 à 05:32, Michael Stone a écrit :
No, it's a pretty common shorthand to say "routable" to mean "routable
on the public internet", especially where there's no real possibility of
confusing it with specifically non-routable blocks like 127.0.0.0/8.
This is still a mistake. In tec
On Wed, Jan 03, 2018 at 07:04:46PM -0600, David Wright wrote:
(In view of
https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2018/01/msg00126.html
do you mean public?)
No, it's a pretty common shorthand to say "routable" to mean "routable
on the public internet", especially where there's no real possibility
On Wednesday, January 03, 2018 01:39:14 PM Michael Stone wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 03, 2018 at 10:36:32AM -0500, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> >I've read in this thread) that traceroute may provide a way forward:
> In general, no. Many ISPs use RFC1918 space internally, so you need to
> skip an unknown nu
On Wed 03 Jan 2018 at 13:39:14 (-0500), Michael Stone wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 03, 2018 at 10:36:32AM -0500, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> >I've read in this thread) that traceroute may provide a way forward:
>
> In general, no. Many ISPs use RFC1918 space internally, so you need
> to skip an unknown nu
Le 03/01/2018 à 03:19, David Wright a écrit :
For example, and sticking to unroutable addresses, they
might be on 192.168.… in one place, 10.… in another etc.
Private addresses are routable. They are just not routed over the public
internet. Link local addresses (169.254.0.0/16) are not routa
On Wed, Jan 03, 2018 at 10:36:32AM -0500, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
I've read in this thread) that traceroute may provide a way forward:
In general, no. Many ISPs use RFC1918 space internally, so you need to
skip an unknown number of hops before you get to a routeable IP, at
which point you m
rhkra...@gmail.com (2018-01-03):
> I hope the OP is still "listening".
If he is, he is probably enjoying the time wasted by his nonsensical
question.
Regards,
--
Nicolas George
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Wednesday, January 03, 2018 07:54:06 AM Dan Purgert wrote:
> At the moment, he's already been told how to get "ip" to resolve
> hostnames (in his other thread -- "ip -r route"), seems he didn't like
> that answer; and made a new one.
I hope the OP is still "listening". (And I'm not the OP.)
(
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
David Wright wrote:
> On Tue 02 Jan 2018 at 11:15:16 (-0500), Greg Wooledge wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 02, 2018 at 04:03:46PM -, Dan Purgert wrote:
>> > Max Power wrote:
>> > > My problem is to know the ISP [e.g. GATEWAY = Vodafone, Telecom or AT&T]
>>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 02, 2018 at 04:03:46PM -, Dan Purgert wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> Max Power wrote:
>> > My problem is to know the ISP [e.g. GATEWAY = Vodafone, Telecom or AT&T]
>> > before starting brow
On Tue 02 Jan 2018 at 11:15:16 (-0500), Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 02, 2018 at 04:03:46PM -, Dan Purgert wrote:
> > Max Power wrote:
> > > My problem is to know the ISP [e.g. GATEWAY = Vodafone, Telecom or AT&T]
> > > before starting browsing or any remote connection...
> >
> > Checkin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, Jan 02, 2018 at 04:03:46PM -, Dan Purgert wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Max Power wrote:
> > My problem is to know the ISP [e.g. GATEWAY = Vodafone, Telecom or AT&T]
> > before starting browsing or any remote
Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 02, 2018 at 04:03:46PM -, Dan Purgert wrote:
>> Max Power wrote:
>> > My problem is to know the ISP [e.g. GATEWAY = Vodafone, Telecom or AT&T]
>> > before starting browsing or any remote connection...
>>
>> Checking the hostname of an RFC1918 address will nea
On Tue, Jan 02, 2018 at 02:47:39PM +0100, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
Hi, Max. I don't know what your intentions are in repeating your
qualms after two solutions were offered to you. Either get along
with the new "ip" or just install the old net-tools. They are not
going away (at least not as long as
On Tue, Jan 02, 2018 at 04:03:46PM -, Dan Purgert wrote:
> Max Power wrote:
> > My problem is to know the ISP [e.g. GATEWAY = Vodafone, Telecom or AT&T]
> > before starting browsing or any remote connection...
>
> Checking the hostname of an RFC1918 address will nearly never provide
> you with
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Max Power wrote:
> My problem is to know the ISP [e.g. GATEWAY = Vodafone, Telecom or AT&T]
> before starting browsing or any remote connection...
Checking the hostname of an RFC1918 address will nearly never provide
you with an ISP's name, even if yo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, Jan 02, 2018 at 01:05:58PM +, Curt wrote:
[...]
> There just was another thread around here initiated by Max Power, the
> current OP, I do believe [...]
Indeed, it was Max (cc'ing him/her just in case). I didn't remember, but
checked now
On Tue, Jan 02, 2018 at 12:42:35PM +0100, Max Power wrote:
My problem is to know the ISP [e.g. GATEWAY = Vodafone, Telecom or AT&T]
before starting browsing or any remote connection...
With the 'route' command it was so easy '# route' and goal!
With le last release 'Stretch' the net-tools packet
On 2018-01-02, wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 02, 2018 at 12:42:35PM +0100, Max Power wrote:
>> My problem is to know the ISP [e.g. GATEWAY = Vodafone, Telecom or AT&T]
>> before starting browsing or any remote connection...
>> With the 'route' command it was so easy '# route' and goal!
>> With le last r
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, Jan 02, 2018 at 12:42:35PM +0100, Max Power wrote:
> My problem is to know the ISP [e.g. GATEWAY = Vodafone, Telecom or AT&T]
> before starting browsing or any remote connection...
> With the 'route' command it was so easy '# route' and goal!
>
My problem is to know the ISP [e.g. GATEWAY = Vodafone, Telecom or AT&T]
before starting browsing or any remote connection...
With the 'route' command it was so easy '# route' and goal!
With le last release 'Stretch' the net-tools packet is not installed by default.
But if this command was so usefu
21 matches
Mail list logo