[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
2000::/6
My guess, actually, would be that someone was entering a more specific default (2000::/3) using a numeric keypad and missed the key with an off by one row error.
There is no matching entry in whois for 2000::/64 (or shorter), so it is unlikely that 2000::/64 was an intended configuration.
Owen
On Sep 12, 2014, at 12:53 AM, Tarko Tikan <tarko at lanparty.ee> wrote:
> hey,
>
>> maybe i am more than usually st00pid this evening, but i am no smarter
>> on what actually happened, how it was detected
>
> Dunno about others but I personally detected it using my tools that look for our prefixes (or more specifics) being advertised by someone else. Large covering prefix obviously triggered the bells.
>
> I'm pretty sure it was a typo in the config, the prefix length had to be /64 but was entered as /6 instead.
>
> --
> tarko
- Follow-Ups:
- 2000::/6
- From: tarko at lanparty.ee (Tarko Tikan)
- References:
- 2000::/6
- From: tarko at lanparty.ee (Tarko Tikan)
- 2000::/6
- From: job at instituut.net (Job Snijders)
- 2000::/6
- From: randy at psg.com (Randy Bush)
- 2000::/6
- From: jared at puck.nether.net (Jared Mauch)
- 2000::/6
- From: randy at psg.com (Randy Bush)
- 2000::/6
- From: tarko at lanparty.ee (Tarko Tikan)