Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: What is China doing with 1.1.1.1?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–18 of 18 posts

Re: Ask HN: What is China doing with 1.1.1.1?

#11

Post by Spivak »

jason_slack wrote: post #9
lathiat wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are part of the reason we have these problems :( While that's probably never getting allocated at this point, that's also what everyone thought 10-20+ years ago about 1.0.0.0/8 and yet here we are. When my organisation was allocated from 110.0.0.0/8 a few years back we were constantly seeking out others to remove us from their "bogon" filters blocking unallocated ranges that were static and not being maintained.…

I worked for a company once where each department had a public IP space, like 97.0.0.x or 98.0.0.x. When I told the network guy this wasn't proper and we should be using 192.168.x.x or 10.x.x.x he laughed and said "it really doesn't matter, nobody cares". To make all of these networks talk, share, etc they had to use a punch of equipment to tie each one in and then out via a Time Warner Road Runner circuit. This was…

It seems as though the conventional wisdom has changed, because in my large org every device is assigned a public IP and access is controlled by our border firewall.

It's weird how much NAT has changed the thinking about network organization -- if you have the addresses you should get into the IPv6 state of mind -- publicly address all the things!

Now if your org picked 97/98 arbitrarily without actually owning the addresses relying on the fact that you wouldn't actually get routed any public traffic then that's a different story.

Re: Ask HN: What is China doing with 1.1.1.1?

#13

Post by duskwuff »

theandrewbailey wrote: post #12
mrkrabo wrote: post #3

That's funny. I use 1.0.0.0/24 for my home network. Perhaps they're doing something similar.

Be legit and use 10.0.0.0/24, or even 10.0.0.0/8 instead.

Or a subnet of 172.16.0.0/12 if you want to be a hipster. :) (Or if you need to interact with other networks that use the other RFC1918 subnets -- hardly anyone uses 172.16.)

Re: Ask HN: What is China doing with 1.1.1.1?

#16

Post by F_r_k »

duskwuff wrote: post #13
theandrewbailey wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Be legit and use 10.0.0.0/24, or even 10.0.0.0/8 instead.

Or a subnet of 172.16.0.0/12 if you want to be a hipster. :) (Or if you need to interact with other networks that use the other RFC1918 subnets -- hardly anyone uses 172.16.)

I deal with lots of devices we put on customers networks. The problem is that 172.16.0.0/12, 10.0.0.0/8 and 192.168.0.0/16 are all used by customer networks. It's a pain when setting up VPN addressing. Thus I chose 11.0.0.0/16 (sadly not possible to use IPv6). My devices will never need to reach DoD, so that's very convenient.

Re: Ask HN: What is China doing with 1.1.1.1?

#17

Post by eggestad »

my guess is that mobile networks do something with it, or some mobile network equipment do something wierd.

I'm in Norway and it seem that a telenor (Norwegian telco) box respons to it:

# ping 1.1.1.1 PING 1.1.1.1 (1.1.1.1) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=246 time=67.3 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=246 time=57.9 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=246 time=77.4 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=246 time=76.1 ms

# traceroute 1.1.1.1 traceroute to 1.1.1.1 (1.1.1.1), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets 1 gateway (192.168.1.1) 1.738 ms 1.746 ms 2.259 ms 2 77.16.1.146.tmi.telenormobil.no (77.16.1.146) 58.505 ms 64.686 ms 64.701 ms 3 10.72.52.250 (10.72.52.250) 64.703 ms 64.684 ms 64.718 ms 4 ti0001a401-ae14-21.ti.telenor.net (193.212.40.13) 71.297 ms 71.320 ms 71.316 ms 5 ti0300c360-ae49-0.ti.telenor.net (146.172.98.241) 87.921 ms 87.927 ms 87.921 ms 6 ti3163c360-ae8-0.ti.telenor.net (146.172.101.194) 87.751 ms 44.302 ms 56.143 ms 7 ti3153c400-ae5-0.ti.telenor.net (146.172.101.221) 56.130 ms 56.133 ms 56.112 ms 8 ti3153d400-ae3-0.ti.telenor.net (146.172.100.82) 62.571 ms 69.241 ms 69.198 ms 9 * * * 10 ti3171a210-xe3-11.ti.telenor.net (146.172.81.102) 68.961 ms *

Re: Ask HN: What is China doing with 1.1.1.1?

#18

Post by corymacd »

Spivak wrote: post #11
jason_slack wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I worked for a company once where each department had a public IP space, like 97.0.0.x or 98.0.0.x. When I told the network guy this wasn't proper and we should be using 192.168.x.x or 10.x.x.x he laughed and said "it really doesn't matter, nobody cares". To make all of these networks talk, share, etc they had to use a punch of equipment to tie each one in and then out via a Time Warner Road Runner circuit. This was…

It seems as though the conventional wisdom has changed, because in my large org every device is assigned a public IP and access is controlled by our border firewall. It's weird how much NAT has changed the thinking about network organization -- if you have the addresses you should get into the IPv6 state of mind -- publicly address all the things! Now if your org picked 97/98 arbitrarily without actually owning the a…

I too have worked at organizations that have been configured like this. I speculate that pressure on the limited IPv4 allocations has caused many places that had previously been configured with large public IP blocks, to sell sub-allocations, for profit. NAT certainly does enable this practice but isn't the root cause. Sell those IPv4 blocks for $$$ -- who needs their laptop getting a public IPv4 address anyway?
Post reply on HN