RCN here in the greater Boston area does CGNAT inside 10.0.0.0/8. This doesn't surprise me.
On Oct 10, 2019, 11:27, at 11:27, Javier J <jav...@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 <meh...@akcin.net> wrote: > >> Yes >> >> On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 20:46 Javier J <jav...@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 <meh...@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 ><jav...@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@nanog.org> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On October 1, 2019 9:39:03 PM UTC, Matt Palmer ><mpal...@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 >>
