Re: [swinog] Connectivity problems with .255 IP Adress

2011-03-31 Diskussionsfäden Benoit Panizzon
Hi Does anybody know of such a problem? Mr. Google couldn't give me any satisfactory results... :-) This looks like a common misconfiguration on multiple 'router' or 'firewalls' to filter such ip addresses. We also had to exclude all .255 and .0 ip addresses from our dhcp ranges because

Re: [swinog] Connectivity problems with .255 IP Adress

2011-03-31 Diskussionsfäden Beat Rubischon
Hi Mike! On 31.03.11 09:44, Mike Kellenberger wrote: One of our customers got a .255 IPv4 address assigned by sunrise. he can't reach any of our Windows Server 2003 hosts Sounds familiar. I had this problem with Windows 9x last time and avoided the usage of .255 and .0 since those days.

Re: [swinog] Connectivity problems with .255 IP Adress

2011-03-31 Diskussionsfäden Oliver Schad
On Thursday 31 March 2011 09:44:27 Mike Kellenberger wrote: One of our customers got a .255 IPv4 address assigned by sunrise. I know that this can be a valid host address with a netmask of /23 or greater, but the strange thing is, that he can't reach any of our Windows Server 2003 hosts with

Re: [swinog] Kaputter Mailserver bei Bluewin

2011-03-31 Diskussionsfäden Stefan Rothenbuehler
On 03/30/11 07:39 PM, Klaus Ethgen wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Hi, kann mal bitte einer von bluewin sich die Mailinfrastruktur ansehen. Alle Mails an Bluewin, selbst die an postmas...@bluewin.ch kommen als Bounce zurück, das relaying denied währe. (Alle über

Re: [swinog] Connectivity problems with .255 IP Adress

2011-03-31 Diskussionsfäden Mario Iseli
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 9:44 AM, Mike Kellenberger mike.kellenber...@escapenet.ch wrote: Hi Hi :) One of our customers got a .255 IPv4 address assigned by sunrise. I know that this can be a valid host address with a netmask of /23 or greater, but the strange thing is, that he can't reach

Re: [swinog] Connectivity problems with .255 IP Adress

2011-03-31 Diskussionsfäden Marcin Cieslak
On Thu, 31 Mar 2011, Oliver Schad wrote: On Thursday 31 March 2011 09:44:27 Mike Kellenberger wrote: Does anybody know of such a problem? Mr. Google couldn't give me any satisfactory results... :-) There is a old windows bug with .255, maybe it's still not solved.

Re: [swinog] Achtung: moegliche (Mail) Probleme durch Aenderung der Nameserver fuer .in-addr.arpa !

2011-03-31 Diskussionsfäden Manfredo Miserocchi
Hi, due the change of the SOA Authority for the domains in-addr.arpa ip6.arpa this is the running configuration for resolvers: zone in-addr.arpa { type slave; file slave/in-addr.arpa.slave; masters { 2001:67c:e0::1; // F.in-addr-servers.net.

[swinog] PCH survey on peering

2011-03-31 Diskussionsfäden Bill Woodcock
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Howdy. We're conducting a statistical overview of peering sessions for a research paper. The paper we produce will be input into OECD guidelines on national communications regulatory frameworks, so we'd very much like it to accurately reflect