59.229.189.0/24

Mailman List Mirror (Read Only)
1

Hello,

Up until today we have been able to reach hosts in the
59.229.189.0/24network via AS174, Cogent, in Toronto. Now we can
not, our packets
stop at 38.112.36.101. The support team at Cogent informed me that network
isn't in the internet routing table.

I attempted to do an AS lookup on it and sure enough it is not. Using
looking glass routers in Korea indicate the same.

Yet it is still reachable from other networks, I can use 'Team Viewer'
and webx to connect to hosts at the remote office which sits within that
/24. When on the remote site, i can do traceroutes back to our office
in Toronto.

This part is a bit confusing to me, from Toronto I get a 'no route to
host'. So packets arriving from Korea to our network shouldn't be able to
find a route back, even if its taking a different path.

any guess why this network may not be advertising its routes or what is
going on here?

thanks in advance,

greg

This is the network route from Toronto to Korea:

Host
Loss% Snt Last Avg Best Wrst StDev
1. 10.101.2.1
0.0% 6 1.5 15.1 1.5 83.3 33.4
2. 10.101.111.11
0.0% 6 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.0
3. 10.101.101.101
0.0% 6 0.7 0.8 0.7 0.8 0.0
4. 38.122.184.161
0.0% 6 <-- ISP ROUTER
5. 38.20.50.130
0.0% 6 1.9 2.0 1.9 2.1 0.0
6. 38.112.36.101
89.0% 5 1.6 1.7 1.6 1.7 0.0

This is the route from Korea to Toronto, done at the same time as the
above.

1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.0.1
2 1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 58.229.189.1
3 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 10.254.241.205
4 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 58.229.66.9
5 2 ms 1 ms 1 ms 58.229.66.105
6 7 ms 5 ms 3 ms 58.229.119.149
7 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 118.221.7.34
8 144 ms 144 ms 144 ms 58.229.92.254
9 276 ms 208 ms 192 ms te-8-2.car1.SanJose2.Level3.net [4.59.0.161]
10 204 ms 162 ms 162 ms ae-2-70.edge1.SanJose3.Level3.net[4.69.152.80]
11 165 ms 165 ms 165 ms
Cogent-level3-4x10G.SanJose.Level3.net[4.68.110.138]
12 156 ms 156 ms 156 ms
be2000.ccr21.sjc01.atlas.cogentco.com[154.54.6.105]
13 166 ms 165 ms 165 ms
be2164.ccr21.sfo01.atlas.cogentco.com[154.54.28.33]
14 187 ms 187 ms 187 ms
be2256.mpd21.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com[154.54.6.90]
15 206 ms 206 ms 206 ms
be2158.mpd21.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com[154.54.7.130]
16 216 ms 216 ms 216 ms
be2081.ccr21.yyz02.atlas.cogentco.com[154.54.42.10]
17 221 ms 221 ms 221 ms te3-8.ccr02.yyz01.atlas.cogentco.com[154.54.5.85]
18 231 ms 230 ms 230 ms
te4-1.mag03.yyz01.atlas.cogentco.com[154.54.86.82]
19 214 ms 215 ms 214 ms 38.122.184.162 <-- OUR ROUTER

2

$ whois -h whois.cymru.com 59.229.189.0
AS | IP | AS Name
NA | 59.229.189.0 | NA

cymru seems to think there's no route for that network. my network agrees.

3

[..]

4 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 58.229.66.9
5 2 ms 1 ms 1 ms 58.229.66.105
6 7 ms 5 ms 3 ms 58.229.119.149

Seems you mean 58 instead of 59.

Greets,
Jeroen

5

Derp.

Hello, this is Quagga (version 0.99.21).
Copyright 1996-2005 Kunihiro Ishiguro, et al.

route-views2.routeviews.org> sho ip bgp 59.229.189.0/24
% Network not in table
route-views2.routeviews.org>
route-views2.routeviews.org>

- - ferg

- --
Paul Ferguson
VP Threat Intelligence, IID
PGP Public Key ID: 0x54DC85B2

6

oh my.... how embarrassing is that...

15 years doing networking too... It was a typo this whole time as
indicated by Jeroen and I didn't even catch it.. will 'its monday' work as
an excuse? :wink: 58 instead of 59. I was pulling my hair on this one,
the network drawing I was referencing has the wrong IP and its been like
that for months.

I sent support those trace routes and they didn't even catch that. I
mention this only to make myself feel a weee bit better..

so sorry for wasting your time but thanks very much for it everyone.

-g