[OT-mask]

[James Knott]

Gregory D Hough wrote:
> Greetings,
> 
> I labelled this OT but it may be right on. An interesting phenomenon  
> occurs when a Linux admin wannabe notices a winbox was compromised  
> within a NATwork and replaces it a different flavor of winnibblets. I'm  
> no astronaut, but this re-entry has been quite a ride.
> 
> Bad guys often wear masks to hide their true identity. "I believe" the  
> same is true with badguysonline. So my question is when if ever should  
> there appear a 255 octet in a host address, and is it wise to do  
> anything but DROP these?
> 
> As I understand it, a packet sent to 192.168.1.255 will be seen by all  
> hosts on the 192.168.1.0. As I understand it, 192.168.0.0/16 is non- 
> routeable on the internet along with a few other reserved network  
> blocks. I'd like to learn how this pertains to the wide area network.  
> Here is just one example:
> 
> 68.95.134.255 resolves to:
> adsl-68-95-134-255.dsl.rcsntx.swbell.net

Perhaps I'm missing something here, but how does your example relate to 
your question?



--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml