AWS issues with 172.0.0.0/12

Thu Oct 10 16:12:57 UTC 2019

IPv6 all the things.

On Thu, Oct 10, 2019, 12:11 PM Neil Hanlon <neil at shrug.pw> wrote:

> RCN here in the greater Boston area does CGNAT inside 10.0.0.0/8. This
> doesn't surprise me.
> On Oct 10, 2019, at 11:27, Javier J <javier at advancedmachines.us> wrote:
>>
>> Very strange ATT would put end users on an RFC 1918 block unless they
>> were doing NAT to the end user.
>> If they were doing NAT, I would expect CGNAT in the 100.something or
>> other range.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 10, 2019, 11:07 AM Mehmet Akcin < mehmet at akcin.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Yes
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 20:46 Javier J < javier at advancedmachines.us>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'm just curious, was the ip in the RFC 1918 172.16.0.0/16 range?
>>>>
>>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1918
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 6:01 PM Mehmet Akcin < mehmet at akcin.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> To close the loop here (in case if someone has this type of issue in
>>>>> the future), I have spoken to AT&T instead of trying to work it out with
>>>>> AWS Hosted Vendor, Reolink.
>>>>>
>>>>> AT&T Changed my public IP, and now I am no longer in that 172.x.x.x
>>>>> block, everything is working fine.
>>>>>
>>>>> mehmet
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 2:54 PM Javier J < javier at advancedmachines.us>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Auto generated VPC in AWS use RFC1819 addresses. This should not
>>>>>> interfere with pub up space.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What is the exact issue? If you can't ping something in AWS chances
>>>>>> are it's a security group blocking you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Oct 1, 2019, 7:00 PM Jim Popovitch via NANOG <
>>>>>> nanog at nanog.org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On October 1, 2019 9:39:03 PM UTC, Matt Palmer < mpalmer at hezmatt.org>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> >On Tue, Oct 01, 2019 at 04:50:33AM -0400, Jim Popovitch via NANOG
>>>>>>> >wrote:
>>>>>>> >> On 10/1/2019 4:09 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
>>>>>>> >> > possible that this is various AWS customers making
>>>>>>> >iptables/firewall mistakes?
>>>>>>> >> >    "block that pesky rfc1918 172/12 space!!"
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> AWS also uses some 172/12 space on their internal network (e.g.
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> >network
>>>>>>> >> that sits between EC2 instances and the AWS external firewalls)
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >Does AWS use 172.0.0.0/12 internally, or 172.16.0.0/12?  They're
>>>>>>> >different
>>>>>>> >things, after all.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't know their entire operations, but they do use some
>>>>>>> 172.16.0.0/12
>>>>>>> addresses internally. And yes, that is very different than 172/12,
>>>>>>> sorry
>>>>>>> for the confusion.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -Jim P.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>> Mehmet
>>> +1-424-298-1903
>>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20191010/77edae8c/attachment.html>