Even if Fairpoint was doing Carrier Grade NAT there is a separate address space
for that (100.64.0.0/10) per RCF 6598. They shouldn't even have 10.0.0.0/8 in
their public routing tables even if they are using this internally. Any decent
ISPs should be filtering the private address space from
light on why it was happening to you on
Sunday.
-- jmcg
On Dec 9, 2012, at 17:33, Joshua Judson Rosen roz...@geekspace.com wrote:
Anyone else experience FairPoint DNS hijacking, this evening?
Between about 16:00 and 17:00, I got home from the mall and noticed
that all of my DNS lookups had
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 7:16 AM, M D L 41mag...@liberty.eprci.com wrote:
Any decent ISPs should be filtering the private address space
from crossing their network.
Leaving the vast majority of ISPs allowing it, alas.
Comcast uses 10/8 for their management network, and I've seen it
leak out
:
Anyone else experience FairPoint DNS hijacking, this evening?
Between about 16:00 and 17:00, I got home from the mall and noticed
that all of my DNS lookups had started returning 10.255.255.10,
which was (and, apparently, *still is*) a webserver serving one page,
which reads
10.255.255.10 is in the 10.0.0.0/8 private address range, which is not
routed
across the public Internet. Therefore the bad server must have been local
to
whatever local network you were connected to at the time.
I'm assuming that Fairpoint has not decided to implement NAT at the ISP
layer
On Sun, 09 Dec 2012 17:33:15 -0500, Joshua Judson Rosen roz...@geekspace.com
wrote:
Anyone else experience FairPoint DNS hijacking, this evening?
Between about 16:00 and 17:00, I got home from the mall and noticed
that all of my DNS lookups had started returning 10.255.255.10,
which
Anyone else experience FairPoint DNS hijacking, this evening?
Between about 16:00 and 17:00, I got home from the mall and noticed
that all of my DNS lookups had started returning 10.255.255.10,
which was (and, apparently, *still is*) a webserver serving one page,
which reads
