nanog mailing list archives
Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6
From: Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2015 22:56:00 -0700
Yes, but TBH, they are advertised as a darkspace collection project, so Cisco’s use is actually somewhat helpful to that activity. It’s unlikely that 1.1.1.0/24 or 1.2.3.0/24 will ever be allocated by APNIC. Owen
On Jul 10, 2015, at 22:47 , Julien Goodwin <nanog () studio442 com au> wrote: On 11/07/15 08:25, Shane Ronan wrote:1.1.1.1 is usually a good betSadly 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 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)