<div dir="ltr">> No, Mehmet's public IP was _not_ from the RFC 1918 <a href="http://172.16.0.0/16" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">172.16.0.0/16</a><br>range. <div><br></div><div>I was guessing the same thing. It wouldn't matter even behind NAT if you are using RFC 1918 unless you are building a tunnel into the VPC since in the AWS VPC, you are behind a NAT / Internet Gateway for anything to reach the public IPv4 internet.</div><div><br></div><div>- Javier</div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 7:48 AM Jay Borkenhagen <<a href="mailto:jayb@braeburn.org">jayb@braeburn.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">I'm surprised that no one else has corrected this, so allow me to do<br>
so for the record.<br>
<br>
No, Mehmet's public IP was _not_ from the RFC 1918 <a href="http://172.16.0.0/16" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">172.16.0.0/16</a><br>
range. <br>
<br>
One of the public ipv4 ranges that AT&T assigns subscriber addresses<br>
from is <a href="http://172.0.0.0/12" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">172.0.0.0/12</a>: [ 172.0.0.0 - 172.15.255.255 ]<br>
<br>
<a href="https://whois.arin.net/rest/net/NET-172-0-0-0-1" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://whois.arin.net/rest/net/NET-172-0-0-0-1</a><br>
<br>
One of the private ipv4 ranges set aside by RFC 1918 is the<br>
neighboring <a href="http://172.16.0.0/12" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">172.16.0.0/12</a>: [ 172.16.0.0 - 172.31.255.255 ]<br>
<br>
<a href="https://whois.arin.net/rest/net/NET-172-16-0-0-1" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://whois.arin.net/rest/net/NET-172-16-0-0-1</a><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
We notice more mis-originations of our <a href="http://172.0.0.0/12" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">172.0.0.0/12</a> space and its<br>
more-specifics than any of our other ipv4 blocks, probably because<br>
other folks are similarly confused. So please, if you intend to use<br>
RFC1918 space, please check your filters to make sure you're using<br>
<a href="http://172.16.0.0/12" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">172.16.0.0/12</a> and not our <a href="http://172.0.0.0/12" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">172.0.0.0/12</a>.<br>
<br>
Jay B.<br>
<br>
<br>
Mehmet Akcin writes:<br>
> Yes<br>
> <br>
> On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 20:46 Javier J <<a href="mailto:javier@advancedmachines.us" target="_blank">javier@advancedmachines.us</a>> wrote:<br>
> <br>
> > I'm just curious, was the ip in the RFC 1918 <a href="http://172.16.0.0/16" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">172.16.0.0/16</a> range?<br>
> ><br>
> > <a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1918" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1918</a><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> > On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 6:01 PM Mehmet Akcin <<a href="mailto:mehmet@akcin.net" target="_blank">mehmet@akcin.net</a>> wrote:<br>
> ><br>
> >> To close the loop here (in case if someone has this type of issue in the<br>
> >> future), I have spoken to AT&T instead of trying to work it out with AWS<br>
> >> Hosted Vendor, Reolink.<br>
> >><br>
> >> AT&T Changed my public IP, and now I am no longer in that 172.x.x.x<br>
> >> block, everything is working fine.<br>
> >><br>
> >> mehmet<br>
> >><br>
> >> On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 2:54 PM Javier J <<a href="mailto:javier@advancedmachines.us" target="_blank">javier@advancedmachines.us</a>><br>
> >> wrote:<br>
> >><br>
> >>> Auto generated VPC in AWS use RFC1819 addresses. This should not<br>
> >>> interfere with pub up space.<br>
> >>><br>
> >>> What is the exact issue? If you can't ping something in AWS chances are<br>
> >>> it's a security group blocking you.<br>
> >>><br>
> >>><br>
> >>><br>
> >>> On Tue, Oct 1, 2019, 7:00 PM Jim Popovitch via NANOG <<a href="mailto:nanog@nanog.org" target="_blank">nanog@nanog.org</a>><br>
> >>> wrote:<br>
> >>><br>
> >>>> On October 1, 2019 9:39:03 PM UTC, Matt Palmer <<a href="mailto:mpalmer@hezmatt.org" target="_blank">mpalmer@hezmatt.org</a>><br>
> >>>> wrote:<br>
> >>>> >On Tue, Oct 01, 2019 at 04:50:33AM -0400, Jim Popovitch via NANOG<br>
> >>>> >wrote:<br>
> >>>> >> On 10/1/2019 4:09 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:<br>
> >>>> >> > possible that this is various AWS customers making<br>
> >>>> >iptables/firewall mistakes?<br>
> >>>> >> > "block that pesky rfc1918 172/12 space!!"<br>
> >>>> >><br>
> >>>> >> AWS also uses some 172/12 space on their internal network (e.g. the<br>
> >>>> >network<br>
> >>>> >> that sits between EC2 instances and the AWS external firewalls)<br>
> >>>> ><br>
> >>>> >Does AWS use <a href="http://172.0.0.0/12" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">172.0.0.0/12</a> internally, or <a href="http://172.16.0.0/12" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">172.16.0.0/12</a>? They're<br>
> >>>> >different<br>
> >>>> >things, after all.<br>
> >>>> ><br>
> >>>><br>
> >>>> I don't know their entire operations, but they do use some<br>
> >>>> <a href="http://172.16.0.0/12" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">172.16.0.0/12</a><br>
> >>>> addresses internally. And yes, that is very different than 172/12, sorry<br>
> >>>> for the confusion.<br>
> >>>><br>
> >>>> -Jim P.<br>
> >>>><br>
> >>>> --<br>
> Mehmet<br>
> +1-424-298-1903<br>
</blockquote></div>