AS12874 - FASTWEB

Anyone from  FASTWEB please get back to me offline.

-- 
Richard

On 5/22/06, Mikisa Richard <rmikisagmail.com> wrote:
>
> Anyone from  FASTWEB please get back to me offline.
>

This page for fastweb (from an ISP in Africa) plus Ernest /
Afrinic's
post asking people to update bogon filters for 41/8 .. both
related.

Reason - fastweb provides NAT'ted ADSL lines to its users. 
And its
users get IPs from 41/8 (among other /8s) - which was
unallocated when
they originally started using it for their dsl pool instead
of using
RFC1918 IPs like everybody else does.

<http://groups.google.com/group/free.it.tlc.provider.fastwe
b/browse_frm/thread/9ef254adc5951a2e/2dbb588d699821bf?lnk=st
&q=fastweb.it+41%2F8&rnum=1#2dbb588d699821bf>

Fastweb seems to think 41/8 is a dsl pool for its users in
Turin

- 1/8  -> IP assegnati alla MAN di Milano
- 2/8  -> IP assegnati alla MAN di Milano Hinterland NORD
- 5/8  -> IP assegnati alla MAN di Genova
- 14/8 -> IP assegnati alla MAN di Milano Hinterland SUD
- 23/8 -> IP assegnati alla MAN di Roma
- 29/8 -> IP assegnati alla MAN del Triveneto
- 31/8 -> IP assegnati alla MAN di Bari
- 37/8 -> IP assegnati alla MAN di Bologna
- 39/8 -> IP assegnati alla MAN di Napoli
- 41/8 -> IP assegnati alla MAN di Torino
- 42/8 -> IP assegnati alla MAN di Reggio Emilia

-- 
Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.listsgmail.com)

On May 24, Suresh Ramasubramanian <ops.listsgmail.com> wrote:

> Fastweb seems to think 41/8 is a dsl pool for its users
in Turin
Indeed. But that list is a bit old, they are also using 59/8
(in use
in the APNIC region) and a few private DoD networks like
26/8 and 29/8:

http://plany.fasthosting.it/dbmap.asp?table=Mappatura

Some customers tried complaining, but I understand that this
did not
have any effect.

-- 
ciao,
Marco

mdLinux.IT (Marco d'Itri) writes:
> On May 24, Suresh Ramasubramanian <ops.listsgmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Fastweb seems to think 41/8 is a dsl pool for its
users in Turin
> Indeed. But that list is a bit old, they are also using
59/8 (in use
> in the APNIC region) and a few private DoD networks
like 26/8 and 29/8:
>
> http://plany.fasthosting.it/dbmap.asp?table=Mappatura
>
> Some customers tried complaining, but I understand that
this did not
> have any effect.

I take it that this means we can use any ip range allocated
to Fastweb
as if it were RFC1918 space, including the necessary border
filters?


Bjørn

Bjørn Mork wrote:
> mdLinux.IT (Marco d'Itri) writes:
>   
>> On May 24, Suresh Ramasubramanian <ops.listsgmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>     
>>> Fastweb seems to think 41/8 is a dsl pool for
its users in Turin
>>>       
>> Indeed. But that list is a bit old, they are also
using 59/8 (in use
>> in the APNIC region) and a few private DoD networks
like 26/8 and 29/8:
>>
>> http://plany.fasthosting.it/dbmap.asp?table=Mappatura
>>
>> Some customers tried complaining, but I understand
that this did not
>> have any effect.
>>     
>
> I take it that this means we can use any ip range
allocated to Fastweb
> as if it were RFC1918 space, including the necessary
border filters?
>
>
> Bjørn
>   
Bjørn,

I'd personally contract to build a moat around their NOC
for Homeland 
Security reasons using as many backhoes as I could get on
short notice.

Andrew

> >> http://plany.fasthosting.it/dbmap.asp?table=Mappatura

> > I take it that this means we can use any ip range
allocated to Fastweb
> > as if it were RFC1918 space, including the
necessary border filters?

> I'd personally contract to build a moat around their
NOC for Homeland 
> Security reasons using as many backhoes as I could get
on short notice.

I would strongly advise against such actions.
European governments take a dim view of terrorist
activities and some countries such as Italy are
particularly sensitive about this. I'm surprised 
that an American on an Internet operations mailing
list would be promoting terrorist activity in 
another NATO member country.

In any case, you can't CONTRACT to do this. The
law does not consider an agreement to perform 
illegal acts to be a contract. The action you describe
is clearly illegal, therefore it cannot be contracted
for.

--Michael Dillon

P.S. this is NANOG, not IRC