Randy Bush wrote:
when we tried it on routers in different parts of the network, it seemed to show similar patterns.
anyone have clues other than net slime and misconfigured nats?
I actually have never seen a NAT box do this (but would like to hear about such cases). The NAT implementations I've worked with have been extremely good about avoiding leaks. The likely cause is routers in people's infrastructure using private address space for point to point links and as ways to avoid using up public address space. Oh, and you might check out a draft by Bill Manning which lists additional address blocks which should be filtered, draft-manning-dsua-00.txt. A URL to a copy is: http://www.amaranthnetworks.com/ietf/drafts/draft-manning-dsua-00.txt Dan -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Daniel Senie dts@senie.com Amaranth Networks Inc. http://www.amaranthnetworks.com