The carrier NAT space is 100.64.0.0/10.  100.1.1.1 is legitimately part of
a Verizon /11; the carrier NAT/Shared Address Space netblock is 100.64.0.0/10
(so we can use the range from 100.64.*.* - 100.127.*.*).

(Reference: http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6598 )

On Sun, Mar 01, 2015 at 07:37:25PM -0800, Chris Stillson wrote:
> the problem with that is, what if someone from a natted device actually
> wants to contact a machine on the 100/8 network?
>
> Chris
>
> On Sun, Mar 1, 2015 at 5:47 PM, max b <maxb.personal@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hey just wanted to mention that it does appear as though 100.0.0.0/12
> > does get routed by a number of internet hosts:
> >
> > traceroute -n 100.1.1.1
> >>  1  192.168.2.1  16.953 ms  18.672 ms  26.622 ms
> >>  2  192.168.1.1  63.993 ms  66.595 ms  67.210 ms
> >>  3  50.185.26.1  81.620 ms  84.669 ms  87.114 ms
> >>  4  68.87.196.89  91.254 ms  91.479 ms  92.388 ms
> >>  5  68.87.57.221  87.381 ms 68.87.55.229  104.986 ms 68.87.55.225
> >> 106.784 ms
> >>  6  68.85.155.234  109.069 ms 68.85.155.238  91.181 ms 68.85.155.234
> >> 102.066 ms
> >>  7  * * *
> >>  8  68.86.86.102  106.262 ms  106.159 ms  106.481 ms
> >>  9  68.86.82.94  100.819 ms  104.484 ms  101.623 ms
> >> 10  23.30.206.94  139.012 ms  138.273 ms  158.165 ms
> >> 11  130.81.209.171  193.143 ms * *
> >> 12  * * *
> >> 13  100.1.1.1  159.241 ms  155.888 ms  156.733 ms
> >>
> >
> > or
> >
> > traceroute 100.1.1.1
> >> traceroute to 100.1.1.1 (100.1.1.1), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
> >>  1  192.168.2.1 (192.168.2.1)  41.102 ms  41.890 ms  44.911 ms
> >>  2  192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1)  50.067 ms  50.663 ms  51.156 ms
> >>  3  50.185.26.1 (50.185.26.1)  60.095 ms  61.839 ms  87.606 ms
> >>  4  GE-2-37-ur01.fremontcev2.ca.sfba.comcast.net (68.87.196.89)  103.734
> >> ms  104.030 ms  177.000 ms
> >>  5  te-0-7-0-21-sur03.oakland.ca.sfba.comcast.net (68.87.57.221)
> >> 176.024 ms te-0-7-0-19-sur03.oakland.ca.sfba.comcast.net (68.85.57.141)
> >> 176.480 ms te-0-7-0-21-sur03.oakland.ca.sfba.comcast.net (68.87.57.221)
> >> 176.684 ms
> >>  6  te-0-2-0-5-ar01.sfsutro.ca.sfba.comcast.net (69.139.199.78)  178.344
> >> ms te-0-2-0-0-ar01.sfsutro.ca.sfba.comcast.net (68.85.155.234)  19.639
> >> ms te-0-2-0-7-ar01.sfsutro.ca.sfba.comcast.net (68.87.194.50)  41.532 ms
> >>  7  * * *
> >>  8  he-2-9-0-0-cr01.losangeles.ca.ibone.comcast.net (68.86.86.102)
> >> 59.336 ms  98.858 ms  98.859 ms
> >>  9  be-13-pe02.11greatoaks.ca.ibone.comcast.net (68.86.82.94)  98.056
> >> ms  102.286 ms  99.433 ms
> >> 10  23.30.206.94 (23.30.206.94)  273.404 ms  274.855 ms  276.308 ms
> >> 11  B200.NWRKNJ-LCR-22.verizon-gni.net (130.81.209.171)  301.458 ms
> >> P0-15-0-0.NWRKNJ-LCR-22.verizon-gni.net (130.81.199.17)  301.773 ms
> >> 302.699 ms
> >> 12  * * *
> >> 13  L101.NWRKNJ-VFTTP-142.verizon-gni.net (100.1.1.1)  378.294 ms
> >> 379.111 ms  378.479 ms
> >>
> >
> > I think we agreed that this is okay as it's supposed to be strictly for
> > internal NAT only, and so any public routing is sort of incidental. Just
> > wanted folks to be apprised of the situation.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > mesh-dev mailing list
> > mesh-dev@lists.sudoroom.org
> > https://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/mesh-dev
> >
> >

> _______________________________________________
> mesh-dev mailing list
> mesh-dev@lists.sudoroom.org
> https://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/mesh-dev

_______________________________________________
mesh-dev mailing list
mesh-dev@lists.sudoroom.org
https://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/mesh-dev