nanog mailing list archives
Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6
From: Julien Goodwin <nanog () studio442 com au>
Date: Sat, 11 Jul 2015 15:47:04 +1000
On 11/07/15 08:25, Shane Ronan wrote:
1.1.1.1 is usually a good bet
Sadly yes, even though it's valid public IP space Cisco still have it documented as their suggested captive portal address.
Despite it (and 1.2.3.0/24) being advertised by $ORK for years at this point on behalf of APNIC.
Current thread:
- Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6, (continued)
- Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6 Mel Beckman (Jul 10)
- Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6 Owen DeLong (Jul 10)
- Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6 Mel Beckman (Jul 10)
- Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6 Owen DeLong (Jul 10)
- Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6 Mel Beckman (Jul 10)
- Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6 mikea (Jul 13)
- Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6 Mel Beckman (Jul 13)
- Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6 Jared Mauch (Jul 10)
- Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6 Mark Andrews (Jul 10)
- Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6 Shane Ronan (Jul 10)
- Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6 Julien Goodwin (Jul 10)
- Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6 Owen DeLong (Jul 10)
- Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6 Jared Mauch (Jul 13)
- Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6 Mel Beckman (Jul 13)
- Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6 A . L . M . Buxey (Jul 13)
- Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6 Mel Beckman (Jul 13)
- Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6 Antonio Querubin (Jul 13)