Was trying to determine where this 'honolulu' speedtest was hosted: Tracing route to honolulu.speedtest.net [74.209.160.12] over a maximum of 30 hops: 1 22 ms * * 123.87.93.224 2 27 ms 29 ms 25 ms hawaiian-telcom-inc.gigabitethernet2-17.core1.lax2.he.net [184.105.134.170] 3 84 ms 90 ms 84 ms gige-g2-17.core1.lax2.he.net [184.105.134.169] 4 92 ms 98 ms 99 ms 10gigabitethernet7-3.core1.sjc2.he.net [184.105.213.5] 5 112 ms 114 ms 112 ms 10gigabitethernet4-3.core1.sea1.he.net [72.52.92.158] 6 113 ms 113 ms 114 ms six.netriver.net [206.81.80.160] 7 113 ms 113 ms 113 ms static-74-209-160-12.lynnwood.netriver.net [74.209.160.12] Trace complete. 123.87.93.224? inetnum: 123.64.0.0 - 123.95.255.255 netname: CTTNET country: CN descr: China TieTong Telecommunications Corporation
On 4/16/11 4:24 PM, "Michael Painter" <tvhawaii@shaka.com> wrote:
Was trying to determine where this 'honolulu' speedtest was hosted:
Tracing route to honolulu.speedtest.net [74.209.160.12] over a maximum of 30 hops: 1 22 ms * * 123.87.93.224 2 27 ms 29 ms 25 ms hawaiian-telcom-inc.gigabitethernet2-17.core1.lax2.he.net [184.105.134.170] 3 84 ms 90 ms 84 ms gige-g2-17.core1.lax2.he.net [184.105.134.169] 4 92 ms 98 ms 99 ms 10gigabitethernet7-3.core1.sjc2.he.net [184.105.213.5] 5 112 ms 114 ms 112 ms 10gigabitethernet4-3.core1.sea1.he.net [72.52.92.158] 6 113 ms 113 ms 114 ms six.netriver.net [206.81.80.160] 7 113 ms 113 ms 113 ms static-74-209-160-12.lynnwood.netriver.net [74.209.160.12] Trace complete.
123.87.93.224?
inetnum: 123.64.0.0 - 123.95.255.255 netname: CTTNET country: CN descr: China TieTong Telecommunications Corporation
Well, the DNS name is for a colocation facility in Lynnwood, WA via the Seattle Internet Exchange. I can confirm that the 6th hop actually does traverse the SIX, in as much as that IP is correct. Regards, Mike
Michael K. Smith - Adhost wrote:
On 4/16/11 4:24 PM, "Michael Painter" <tvhawaii@shaka.com> wrote:
Was trying to determine where this 'honolulu' speedtest was hosted:
Tracing route to honolulu.speedtest.net [74.209.160.12] over a maximum of 30 hops: 1 22 ms * * 123.87.93.224 2 27 ms 29 ms 25 ms hawaiian-telcom-inc.gigabitethernet2-17.core1.lax2.he.net [184.105.134.170] 3 84 ms 90 ms 84 ms gige-g2-17.core1.lax2.he.net [184.105.134.169] 4 92 ms 98 ms 99 ms 10gigabitethernet7-3.core1.sjc2.he.net [184.105.213.5] 5 112 ms 114 ms 112 ms 10gigabitethernet4-3.core1.sea1.he.net [72.52.92.158] 6 113 ms 113 ms 114 ms six.netriver.net [206.81.80.160] 7 113 ms 113 ms 113 ms static-74-209-160-12.lynnwood.netriver.net [74.209.160.12] Trace complete.
123.87.93.224?
inetnum: 123.64.0.0 - 123.95.255.255 netname: CTTNET country: CN descr: China TieTong Telecommunications Corporation
Well, the DNS name is for a colocation facility in Lynnwood, WA via the Seattle Internet Exchange. I can confirm that the 6th hop actually does traverse the SIX, in as much as that IP is correct.
Regards,
Mike
Thanks. What concerned me was the first hop...22ms. is ~ the distance from Maui to Oahu, but why the Chinese IP? Cruel joke? I"m using Hawaiian Telcom's ADSL service and that first hop has always been their gateway IP address. Another TCP trace shows the first hop as 123.74.62.128...another CN address.
On 4/16/11 6:03 PM, Michael Painter wrote:
Thanks. What concerned me was the first hop...22ms. is ~ the distance from Maui to Oahu, but why the Chinese IP? Cruel joke? I"m using Hawaiian Telcom's ADSL service and that first hop has always been their gateway IP address. Another TCP trace shows the first hop as 123.74.62.128...another CN address.
I'm assuming your provider's network engineers (stupidly) assumed 123.x.x.x was a good idea for use in a private setup because it hadn't been assigned from the global pool (yet). Wouldn't be the first provider or service to not use proper RFC assigned private IP space for their internal networking setup. -- Brielle Bruns The Summit Open Source Development Group http://www.sosdg.org / http://www.ahbl.org
Brielle Bruns wrote:
On 4/16/11 6:03 PM, Michael Painter wrote:
Thanks. What concerned me was the first hop...22ms. is ~ the distance from Maui to Oahu, but why the Chinese IP? Cruel joke? I"m using Hawaiian Telcom's ADSL service and that first hop has always been their gateway IP address. Another TCP trace shows the first hop as 123.74.62.128...another CN address.
I'm assuming your provider's network engineers (stupidly) assumed 123.x.x.x was a good idea for use in a private setup because it hadn't been assigned from the global pool (yet).
Wouldn't be the first provider or service to not use proper RFC assigned private IP space for their internal networking setup.
Well, in the 7-8 years I've been with them, they've never used Private IP space. IPConfig shows: Connection-specific DNS Suffix . : hawaiiantel.net Description . . . . . . . . . . . : CNet PRO200WL PCI Fast Ethernet Adapter Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-08-A1-01-0E-29 Dhcp Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : Yes Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 72.234.20x.x Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.254.0 Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 72.234.206.1 DHCP Server . . . . . . . . . . . : 72.235.80.4 DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 72.235.80.12 72.235.80.4
Brielle Bruns wrote:
On 4/16/11 6:03 PM, Michael Painter wrote:
Thanks. What concerned me was the first hop...22ms. is ~ the distance from Maui to Oahu, but why the Chinese IP? Cruel joke? I"m using Hawaiian Telcom's ADSL service and that first hop has always been their gateway IP address. Another TCP trace shows the first hop as 123.74.62.128...another CN address.
I'm assuming your provider's network engineers (stupidly) assumed 123.x.x.x was a good idea for use in a private setup because it hadn't been assigned from the global pool (yet).
Wouldn't be the first provider or service to not use proper RFC assigned private IP space for their internal networking setup.
Apologies...missed operative word 'internal'.<s> They are testing IPTV on Oahu in preperation for roll-out, so maybe they renumbered in order to more easily identify the segments.(?)
On 2011-04-16 20:06, Michael Painter wrote:
Brielle Bruns wrote:
I'm assuming your provider's network engineers (stupidly) assumed 123.x.x.x was a good idea for use in a private setup because it hadn't been assigned from the global pool (yet).
Wouldn't be the first provider or service to not use proper RFC assigned private IP space for their internal networking setup.
Apologies...missed operative word 'internal'.<s>
I was about to reply pointing that out. FWIW, they're not announcing that space, so I definitely agree with the poorly-thought-out private infrastructure theory. http://bgp.he.net/AS36149#_prefixes FWIW.
They are testing IPTV on Oahu in preperation for roll-out, so maybe they renumbered in order to more easily identify the segments.(?)
Really, I'd have hoped they'd use their two-year-old 2607:f9a0::/32 for anything that ambitious...but I might be wishing for too much. (Also, that 123 block seems to have been allocated in 2006, so it'd be even more unprofessional to start projects with that space since then.) Jima
On Sat, 16 Apr 2011, Jima wrote:
I was about to reply pointing that out. FWIW, they're not announcing that space, so I definitely agree with the poorly-thought-out private infrastructure theory. http://bgp.he.net/AS36149#_prefixes FWIW.
Poorly thought out private IP space? Nah...it's part of their security measures. It keeps those pesky Chinese from communicating with their network. Bots, bulletproof spammer hosting, who needs to talk to that? :) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Jon Lewis, MCP :) | I route Senior Network Engineer | therefore you are Atlantic Net | _________ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________
participants (6)
-
Brielle Bruns
-
Jima
-
Joel Jaeggli
-
Jon Lewis
-
Michael K. Smith - Adhost
-
Michael Painter