zsolutions at cogeco.ca
Tue Jan 15 21:49:24 UTC 2002
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sean Donelan" <sean at donelan.com>
To: "Steven M. Bellovin" <smb at research.att.com>
Cc: "David G. Andersen" <dga at lcs.mit.edu>; "Ian A Finlay"
<iaf at andrew.cmu.edu>; <nanog at merit.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 2:27 PM
Subject: Re: huh
> On Tue, 15 Jan 2002, Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
> > > Um, it's firewalled? Most of microsoft isn't traceroutable or
> > >pingable.
> > Yup:
> > b129$ ipsrvtrace -p 80 windowsupdate.microsoft.com
> > 15 126.96.36.199 188.8.131.52 155.934 156.415 156.973
> > 16 iusbsecurc1202-ge-6-0.msft.net 184.108.40.206 13.109 13.598
> > 17 - - * * *
> > 18 220.127.116.11 18.104.22.168 13.988 14.373 *
> Microsoft has been moving/changing Windowsupdate.microsoft.com for
> the last week or so. The problems have been covered extensively
> in other forums.
> Although microsoft technicians have messed up access filters on its
> routers in the past, I believe this is just them blocking some packets
> used by the standard traceroute. If you are having other problems
> with windowsupdate, I think they are unrelated to traceroute.
Ok, well this is good to know. Although it still doesn't explain why my
firewall is reporting DNS UDP/TCP probes from windowupdate.com on a regular
More information about the NANOG