TSTT Forum: matt - Viewing Profile

Jump to content

matt's Profile User Rating: -----

matt's Photo
Reputation: 0 Neutral
Group:
Members
Active Posts:
24 (0 per day)
Most Active In:
High Speed ADSL (13 posts)
Joined:
17-May 07
Profile Views:
2,679
Last Active:
User is offline Aug 07 2008 11:07 AM
Currently:
Offline

Latest Visitors

  • PhotoKukka Icon
    06 Nov 2007 - 23:15
Icon   matt has not set their status

  1. About Me
  2. Topics

Posts I've Made

  1. In Topic: DNS problems?

    Posted 7 Aug 2008

    View Post Razzzhead, on Aug 7 2008, 10:20 AM, said:

    Lich, are you saying that your script only gets in a mess when your assigned TSTT IP address ends in a zero? You say it's happened twice in one day, but did that result in problems both times compared to no problems when the assigned IP address ended non-zero? I could be the zero issue is a red herring since the chance of being assigned an address ending in zero in the range 190.59.0.z to 190.59.255.z is (256-2*) to 1. So that means if during your wall climbing to get your script working, you re-boot your router say 500 or so times, you would get an address of 190.59.n.0 maybe twice. If your assigned address is in a completely different range to 190.59.0.0/16 then the odds of course are different.

    By the way, on which router are you using dd-wrt and for what reason?

    [ * -2 because the addresses 190.59.0.0 and 190.59.255.255 should never be assigned]


    Isn't ip addresses assign by ppp are given a 255.255.255.255 subnet mask? And by your logic you should ((256 - 255) - 2), which equals -1 hosts address(which means no ip address).
    Few applications and routers break, because they weren't designed with that situation in mind.

  2. In Topic: DNS problems?

    Posted 6 Aug 2008

    .0 and .255 can be used by hosts, since node and broadcast address doesn't matter with PPP unlike ethernet.

  3. In Topic: DNS problems?

    Posted 6 Aug 2008

    View Post Razzzhead, on Aug 6 2008, 09:42 AM, said:

    The address 190.59.66.0 is probably fine and corresponds to the FQDN of cuscon113628.tstt.net.tt. Only if the subnet mask is 255.255.255.0 would the address 190.59.66.0 be reserved as the network name and should not be allocated as a valid host address. The Network Name TT-TSOT1-LACNIC that is allocated to TSTT has a range of IP addresses of 190.59.0.0 to 190.59.255.255 (or 190.59.0.0/16 in CIDR equivalent notation). The CIDR mask for this range would be 255.255.0.0 and therefore has a theoretical number of subnets of 65536 and maximum addresses of 65534, because the start and end addresses are reserved. Your address of 190.59.66.0 is somewhere in the middle of the range.

    However if you do an NSLOOKUP of 190.59.0.0 and 190.59.255.255 you get returns of cuscon96732.tstt.net.tt and cuscon162267.tstt.net.tt respectively. This is probably an error in the master Domain Name Server as those addresses should never be assigned to customer WAN addresses, and should always return a DNS error.

    Compare NSLOOKUP of ns1.tstt.net.tt[196.3.132. 1] which is the first valid host address for the range 196.3.132.0 to 196.3.133.255 (CIDR 196.3.132.0/23) with NSLOOKUP 196.3.132.0 and 196.3.133.255, which both fail as they should. See CIDR



    .0 is quite valid for point-to-point links, since it's non-broadcast http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/ rfc3021.html.

  4. In Topic: Blink Latency

    Posted 16 Jun 2008

    yup, latency went through the roof this morning.

  5. In Topic: Router

    Posted 1 Jun 2008

    I believe TSTT has those ports firewall at their internet backbone.

My Information

Member Title:
Member
Age:
Age Unknown
Birthday:
Birthday Unknown

Contact Information

E-mail:
Private

Friends

matt hasn't added any friends yet.

Comments

matt has no profile comments yet. Why not say hello?