Is this only DSL? I have ATT fiber, no problems here.
AT&T updates firmware to block access to 1.1.1.1
151–160 of 382 posts
Re: AT&T updates firmware to block access to 1.1.1.1
#152This is likely due to incompetence, not malice. FWIW, it’s possible to bypass AT&T’s router: https://github.com/jaysoffian/eap_proxy That said, I tried 1.1.1.1 and found I had to switch back to Google DNS since Cloudflare intentionally doesn’t support EDNS Client Subnet which was causing my AppleTV’s to have trouble loading content.
I’m thinking incompetence too. If they really wanted to block it they’d do it upstream, not at the router firmware level.
Re: AT&T updates firmware to block access to 1.1.1.1
#153I'd say there is a 98% chance this is a bug in some firmware and a 2% chance AT&T is intentionally trying to block Cloudflare DNS. I get why people are paranoid about ISPs blocking content and net neutrality, but let's not cry wolf prematurely. The technical details here strongly suggest a bug rather than intentional blocking of 1.1.1.1 DNS traffic.
What's that saying about not attributing to malice, what is more easily explained as stupidity or incompetence or whatever? (Occom's Razon and all that). AT&T routers also don't let you use a 10.x address at home (possibly to prepare for carrier grade NAT, although there is an official 100.x address reserved for that; so fuck you ATT). I'm so sick of my AT&T router/modem for various other reasons. I hate how you are…
Wouldn't it be possible to use your own router and treat the AT&T router essentially like a modem? I ask because I'm about to move to an address that can get AT&T fiber.
Re: AT&T updates firmware to block access to 1.1.1.1
#154Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've made this argument before (and it does make some sense), but I also doubt that enough people will understand this nuance for it to really matter.
> but I also doubt that enough people will understand this nuance for it to really matter. Certainly that's the first step. There's options for the second step. But advertising seems like it would be the most powerful. "Why use us over AT&T? Because you're not getting the Internet. You're getting what AT&T decides you should look at." "We don't block Netflix or Hulu or a whole host of other streaming services, unlike…
Who's advertising this when AT&T has a legal monopoly or duopoly in your town?
Re: AT&T updates firmware to block access to 1.1.1.1
#155While far from perfect, for anyone looking for a temporary solution, run pi-hole on a remote server and have it use 1.1.1.1 as its DNS. You'll get the benefit of pi-hole blocking ads.
Re: AT&T updates firmware to block access to 1.1.1.1
#156Earlier quoted context omitted.
We used to use RFC1918 (172.16/12 IIRC) addresses for the communication between internal nodes in a cluster-in-box system that I worked on, which worked great until we had a subnet collision on a customer's network. Leaves me wondering if link-local (169.254/16, fe80::/10) would have been a better option - while technically the customer could decide to make the external (customer-facing) network have a link-local int…
In a cluster-in-a-box scenario, you could modify the OS's network scripts to have the cluster-specific private interface start after the general LAN interface is up. Check both 10/8 and 172.16/12 to see if they're used by the public interface, and use whichever one isn't for the cluster network.
That only works if the host is on the conflicting network. But if the conflict is a couple hops away, Docker won't detect it.
Re: AT&T updates firmware to block access to 1.1.1.1
#157Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you have a reference for the ipv6 address being blocked? That would be a much bigger smoking gun
https://blog.cloudflare.com/dns-resolver-1-1-1-1/ > For IPv6, we have chosen 2606:4700:4700::1111 and 2606:4700:4700::1001 for our service. It’s not as easy to get cool IPv6 addresses; however, we’ve picked an address that only uses digits. For me up in Canada, ping 1.1.1.1 works. But ping6 2606:4700:4700::1111 ping6 2606:4700:4700::1001 shows "connect: Network is unreachable". Am I using ping6 wrong? We also need to…
ipv6 supports traceroute too
Re: AT&T updates firmware to block access to 1.1.1.1
#158This is likely due to incompetence, not malice. FWIW, it’s possible to bypass AT&T’s router: https://github.com/jaysoffian/eap_proxy That said, I tried 1.1.1.1 and found I had to switch back to Google DNS since Cloudflare intentionally doesn’t support EDNS Client Subnet which was causing my AppleTV’s to have trouble loading content.
I don't know much about networking, but I do have that router. Can you please explain what this does/why someone would want this?
It allows you to completely bypass AT&T's router, so you can use your own router talking directly to the ONT. The AT&T router is then necessary only to authenticate to the ONT. So the proxy, running on your own router, sends authentication packets (and their responses) from the ONT to the AT&T router, but otherwise the AT&T router isn't handling any packets.
Re: AT&T updates firmware to block access to 1.1.1.1
#159Is this only DSL? I have ATT fiber, no problems here.
I experience this on ATT fiber. ping'ing 1.1.1.1 times out.
Re: AT&T updates firmware to block access to 1.1.1.1
#160Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's that saying about not attributing to malice, what is more easily explained as stupidity or incompetence or whatever? (Occom's Razon and all that). AT&T routers also don't let you use a 10.x address at home (possibly to prepare for carrier grade NAT, although there is an official 100.x address reserved for that; so fuck you ATT). I'm so sick of my AT&T router/modem for various other reasons. I hate how you are…
Wouldn't it be possible to use your own router and treat the AT&T router essentially like a modem? I ask because I'm about to move to an address that can get AT&T fiber.
Yes: https://www.att.com/Common/storefront/resources/pdf/att_brid...
However, I still can't ping 1.1.1.1.