On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 14:23:56 -0500 (EST)
Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com wrote:
From an intermediate routing standpoint, though, it would be easier
to add an *adjacent* block, not one halfway across the address space,
no?
One never knows how the address space is carved up. Changing what
were
On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 03:44:48 +, Stephen R. Carter said:
Here is a small excerpt I am seeing.
06:04:04.760869 In 00:21:a0:fb:53:d9 ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff, ethertype ARP
(0x0806), length 60: arp who-has 97.85.59.219 tell 97.85.58.1
06:04:04.761950 In 00:21:a0:fb:53:d9 ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff,
This is normal for a cable modem network. These are broadcast packets so
they get delivered to everybody on that node.
ARP uses layer-2 broadcast to ask for the owner of a given IP to respond
with its MAC so that subsequent communication with that IP can be addressed
directly.
[sent from mobile
On 12/29/14, 10:49 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu valdis.kletni...@vt.edu
wrote:
On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 03:44:48 +, Stephen R. Carter said:
Here is a small excerpt I am seeing.
06:04:04.760869 In 00:21:a0:fb:53:d9 ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff, ethertype
ARP (0x0806), length 60: arp who-has
- Original Message -
From: Rampley Jr, Jim F jim.ramp...@charter.com
On 12/29/14, 10:49 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu
valdis.kletni...@vt.edu
wrote:
On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 03:44:48 +, Stephen R. Carter said:
Here is a small excerpt I am seeing.
06:04:04.760869 In
On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 12:27:04PM -0500, Jay Ashworth wrote:
Valdis, you are correct. What your seeing is caused by multiple IP
blocks being assigned to the same CMTS interface.
Am I incorrect, though, in believing that ARP packets should only be visible
within a broadcast domain,
- Original Message -
From: Brett Frankenberger r...@rbfnet.com
On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 12:27:04PM -0500, Jay Ashworth wrote:
Valdis, you are correct. What your seeing is caused by multiple IP
blocks being assigned to the same CMTS interface.
Am I incorrect, though, in
On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 11:12:34AM -0600, Rampley Jr, Jim F wrote:
On 12/29/14, 10:49 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu valdis.kletni...@vt.edu
wrote:
On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 03:44:48 +, Stephen R. Carter said:
Here is a small excerpt I am seeing.
06:04:04.760869 In 00:21:a0:fb:53:d9
On 12/29/14, 12:51 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
Ok. But the interface to which the cablemodem is attached, in the general
single-DHCP-IP case, is a /24, is it not?
I'm on TWC. The IP address I get from them is on a /20.
104.230.32.0/20 dev eth7 proto kernel scope link src 104.230.32.x
The
On Dec 29, 2014, at 11:51 AM, Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com wrote:
Ok. But the interface to which the cablemodem is attached, in the general
single-DHCP-IP case, is a /24, is it not?
No, I've seen multiple IPv4 /21s assigned to a single customer interface on a
CMTS. The newer CMTS are
The CM is just a bridge for that traffic. It has a management IP assigned to
it by the provider but that's a different network so to speak.
Phil
-Original Message-
From: Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com
Sent: 12/29/2014 12:52 PM
To: NANOG nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Charter ARP Leak
- Original Message -
From: David Coulson da...@davidcoulson.net
We all knows it's easier to add another secondary IP to the interface
and add a new DHCP scope than to try to expand a subnet.
From an intermediate routing standpoint, though, it would be easier to
add an *adjacent*
it comes to garbage received on
your interface either.
-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of David Coulson
Sent: Monday, December 29, 2014 12:57 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Charter ARP Leak
Not sure I understand what all the excitement is about?
On 12/29/2014 11:35, Brett Frankenberger wrote:
On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 12:27:04PM -0500, Jay Ashworth wrote:
Valdis, you are correct. What your seeing is caused by multiple IP
blocks being assigned to the same CMTS interface.
Am I incorrect, though, in believing that ARP packets should only
Well sure they are subnets :-) of 0.0.0.0/4
range: 0.0.0.0 15.255.255.255
range b10: 0 268435455
range b16: 0x0 0xfff
hosts: 268435456
prefixlen: 4
mask:240.0.0.0
Doubt anyone should ever describe them as such unless they own all that space
though. May God rest
On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 17:41:45 -0500, Corey Touchet
corey.touc...@corp.totalserversolutions.com wrote:
We'll I would for one be very interested if the 8 ARP packets a second
count against the caps.
Depends on where and what counters they probe. I would assume they look at
unicast fields,
On 12/29/2014 22:32, Ricky Beam wrote:
On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 17:41:45 -0500, Corey Touchet
corey.touc...@corp.totalserversolutions.com wrote:
We'll I would for one be very interested if the 8 ARP packets a second
count against the caps.
Depends on where and what counters they probe. I would
: Charter ARP Leak
On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 17:41:45 -0500, Corey Touchet
corey.touc...@corp.totalserversolutions.com wrote:
We'll I would for one be very interested if the 8 ARP packets a second
count against the caps.
Depends on where and what counters they probe. I would assume they look
18 matches
Mail list logo
