IP addresses not UK - Can customers please report any problems here

[#1]

Quote from: matthews

Have you got anything else you can use (mobile phone, tablet etc) you can try on your connection to rule out it being your computer/firewall/AV?

Yes, I have tried using my Android tablet to reach the sites blocked on my PC, and they are also unreachable, so it's not my PC.

[#2]

Quote from: Bob

Different PC, different connection. Is there a reason why you don't want to drop your own connection? I can do it from here if that would help?

It's just that I feel there's a basic point that's being avoided here - even if I reconnect with an IP which is not in the problem range, at some point in the future I (or other Plusnet customers) may be assigned one of the problem ones again. Reconnecting is a work-around, not a solution.

[#3]

... and not disconnecting/connecting to get a different IP to prove it is specifically the IP range and not something else related to your account is just bloody minded. The more solid evidence Bob gets, the more weight it gives to his efforts to get what needs to be done, done.

[#4]

Quote from: NorthPole

It's just that I feel there's a basic point that's being avoided here - even if I reconnect with an IP which is not in the problem range...

...and I do not get the problem...
Will confirm to Bob that the issue you have reported IS associated with the IP range ... and not something else requiring further DIFFERENT investigation.
Sometimes the best way to prove that something is at fault is to show that there is no issue when it is removed from the equation.  FIxing your immediate issue by avoiding the cause does not imply that the systemic issue will then be ignored - certainly not by Bob.

[#5]

Well, as no-one seems to accept my point, I just have re-started the router, and this time have been assigned an IP address in the range 80.229.61.xxx (as well as a slightly better connection speed!) - this IP is geolocated as being in Sheffield and assigned to Plusnet. As I now can connect to the problem sites previously mentioned, I rest my case regarding issues with the block of former Infonet IP's. Incidentally, my previous IP was also reported with a subsidiary address of 'dyn something something' - sorry I didn't note the full details, but I assumed this was normal for any Plusnet IP. However, the new one doesn't report anything like that.

[#6]

Quote from: NorthPole

Incidentally, my previous IP was also reported with a subsidiary address of 'dyn something something' - sorry I didn't note the full details, but I assumed this was normal for any Plusnet IP. However, the new one doesn't report anything like that.

It is normal. The problem there is with the new IP you've been assigned (it has no rDNS at all). Doubt that will cause you any problems but I'll mention it to somebody none-the-less.
I'll try replicating the Mailinator/Fastone problem from the 146.200.0.0/16 range and post my findings shortly...

[#7]

Quote from: NorthPole

Well, as no-one seems to accept my point,

I'm totally at a loss to understand what point you were trying to make. Bob has said when they know an issue is caused by the IP range they will address it. All Bob wanted was for you to carry out a simple test to confirm that it is the same issue.

Quote from: Bob

Quote from: NorthPole That may solve the problem for me, at least for a while. But shouldn't Plusnet be dealing with the root cause of the problem and getting these IP's formally re-assigned from Infonet... The answer to this supposition is in some of my earlier contributions to this thread. We can approach Mailinator/Fastone etc. ourselves, however before doing so, I'd want to be sure that the problem /is/ related to the 146.200.0.0/16 IP range. That can be easily ascertained from you disconnecting/reconnecting. If it 'fixes' things then we can try replicating the issue here. Assuming we can, we'll reach out to Mailinator etc. Having said that, the symptoms you describe aren't typical of your usual geolocation problems.

You stalled for nearly a week and then within just after half an hour of you doing the test as requested Bob's picked it up and is running with it.
All you've achieved by your obstinacy is a significant delay!

[#8]

Took me a while, however I've managed to get access to a line that's assigned an IP within the 146.200.0.0/16 range.
I've tried accessing both mailinator.com and faststone.org website without encountering any problems (see attached). This suggests that the problem may not have been the IP range after all. There is of course the possibility that access was being blocked from the specific IP assigned to NorthPole, however it's nigh on impossible for me to test that theory and in all honesty, it's fairly unlikely.

Quote from: NorthPole

To get round the issues with the firewall on my desktop PC, I ran some diagnostics from my Android tablet last night. You will see from the attachments that a traceroute to Mailinator fails at IP 207.99.53.42, which a whois reveals is Net Access Corporation in New Jersey, USA. So it seems to me that my own IP (or a whole group of Plusnet IP's which include it) are being blocked by that company.

My traceroute results are the same whether I'm assigned this IP in the 146.200.0.0/16 range:

shamu:/ # traceroute www.mailinator.com
traceroute to www.mailinator.com (23.239.11.30), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets
 1  192.168.1.254 (192.168.1.254)  1.997 ms  1.792 ms  1.872 ms
 2  lo0.10.central10.ptw-bng01.plus.net (195.166.128.170)  20.674 ms  21.494 ms  20.901 ms
 3  irb.10.PTW-CR02.plus.net (84.93.249.2)  23.722 ms  irb.10.PTW-CR01.plus.net (84.93.249.1)  21.490 ms  irb.10.PTW-CR02.plus.net (84.93.249.2)  21.376 ms
 4  linx.peer.nac.net (195.66.224.94)  101.258 ms  100.921 ms  100.674 ms
 5  0.e3-2.tbr1.tl9.nac.net (209.123.11.141)  101.047 ms  linx.peer.nac.net (195.66.224.94)  100.047 ms  101.514 ms
 6  0.e1-4.tbr1.mmu.nac.net (209.123.10.101)  101.607 ms  0.e3-2.tbr1.tl9.nac.net (209.123.11.141)  105.846 ms  0.e1-4.tbr1.mmu.nac.net (209.123.10.101)  111.976 ms
 7  207.99.53.42 (207.99.53.42)  102.274 ms  0.e1-4.tbr1.mmu.nac.net (209.123.10.101)  102.135 ms  102.013 ms
 8  *  *  *
 9  *  *  *
10  *  *  *
11  *^C

Or my usual IP that sits in the 80.229.0.0/16 range:

raspbmc:~$ traceroute www.mailinator.com
traceroute to www.mailinator.com (23.239.11.30), 30 hops max, 60 byte 
packets
  1  192.168.1.254 (192.168.1.254)  4.471 ms  4.146 ms  3.910 ms
  2  lo0.10.central10.pcl-bng02.plus.net (195.166.130.151)  16.003 ms  17.470 ms  17.245 ms
  3  irb.10.PCL-CR02.plus.net (84.93.249.82)  18.747 ms irb.10.PCL-CR01.plus.net (84.93.249.81)  16.787 ms  16.544 ms
  4  ae2.pcl-cr01.plus.net (195.166.129.6)  18.038 ms  17.805 ms  20.465 ms
  5  linx.peer.nac.net (195.66.224.94)  98.088 ms ae2.ptw-cr01.plus.net (195.166.129.4)  17.968 ms linx.peer.nac.net (195.66.224.94)  97.475 ms
  6  linx.peer.nac.net (195.66.224.94)  97.255 ms  96.594 ms 0.e3-2.tbr1.tl9.nac.net (209.123.11.141)  96.257 ms
  7  0.e1-4.tbr1.mmu.nac.net (209.123.10.101)  96.030 ms  100.532 ms 0.e3-2.tbr1.tl9.nac.net (209.123.11.141)  96.653 ms
  8  0.e1-4.tbr1.mmu.nac.net (209.123.10.101)  99.978 ms 207.99.53.42 (207.99.53.42)  97.877 ms 0.e1-4.tbr1.mmu.nac.net (209.123.10.101)  99.542 ms
  9  * 207.99.53.42 (207.99.53.42)  99.091 ms *
10  * * *
11  * * *
12  * * *
13  * * *
14  * *^C

[#9]

Quote from: Bob

The problem there is with the new IP you've been assigned (it has no rDNS at all). Doubt that will cause you any problems but I'll mention it to somebody none-the-less.

Thanks Bob (and also for your subsequent post) - I don't seem to be having much luck with IP addresses, do I?

[#10]

Quote from: Bob

Quote from: NorthPole Incidentally, my previous IP was also reported with a subsidiary address of 'dyn something something' - sorry I didn't note the full details, but I assumed this was normal for any Plusnet IP. However, the new one doesn't report anything like that. It is normal. The problem there is with the new IP you've been assigned (it has no rDNS at all). Doubt that will cause you any problems but I'll mention it to somebody none-the-less.

This has been raised internally (ref: 85036). It affects two IP ranges:
80.229.48.0 /21, and
80.229.56.0 /21
Shouldn't be too long before it's fixed.

[#11]

Quote from: Bob

Shouldn't be too long before it's fixed.

Thanks again Bob - interestingly, a reverse DNS lookup via http://www.dnsgoodies.com/ gives:
Server: 4.2.2.1
Address: 4.2.2.1#53
Non-authoritative answer:
Name: webservio.com
Address: 199.15.255.xxx
(I've x'd the last three digits)
and (wait for it!) Webservio.com are in the USA!
But using http://mxtoolbox.com/ gives:
94.14.189.xx.dyn.plus.net
Again, last three digits x'd.
So perhaps your magic has already worked!

[#12]

Quote from: NorthPole

Thanks again Bob - interestingly, a reverse DNS lookup via http://www.dnsgoodies.com/ gives: Server: 4.2.2.1 Address: 4.2.2.1#53 Non-authoritative answer: Name: webservio.com Address: 199.15.255.xxx (I've x'd the last three digits) and (wait for it!) Webservio.com are in the USA!

That's not what I get from that site

Server: 4.2.2.1
Address: 4.2.2.1#53
Non-authoritative answer:
94.14.189.XX.in-addr.arpa name = 94.14.189.XX.dyn.plus.net.

Quote from: NorthPole

But using http://mxtoolbox.com/ gives: 94.14.189.xx.dyn.plus.net

That looks more like it. Verified from command line:

~$ host  XX.189.14.94
94.14.189.XX.in-addr.arpa domain name pointer 94.14.189.XX.dyn.plus.net.

Quote from: NorthPole

So perhaps your magic has already worked!

Certainly looks like it!

[#13]

fixed

[#14]

Quote from: ejs

It's the 146.200.*.* range of IP addresses, which do have some Plusnet details but also INFONET, I don't think Plusnet have ever used the 146.198.*.* range.

We will be soon.

[#15]

Assuming no hurdles are encountered, customers will start getting assigned IP's from 146.198.0.0/16 towards the middle of next week.
Do shout up if you spot any oddities.