Re: Anyone using Earthlink!

If she has Earthlink DSSL then she is using a PPPoE connection. This
will produce some odd IP configuraions at IPCONFIG. FOr instance,
here's mine.

    Connection Type: PPPoE
    Internet IP Address: 68.###.###.###
    Subnet Mask: 255.255.255.255
    Default Gateway: 172.31.255.251
    DNS IP Address: 207.###.###.###
    MAC Address: 00:13:10:B8:2D:0F

Normally this would be a totally invlaid config since I have no valid
network or valid gateway. But It is not unusual. The 68.###.###.###
is my public address and is pingable BECAUSE I CONFIGURED IT TO BE
PINGABLE.

WIndows XP SP2 blocks all ICMP(ping, traceroute, etc) traffic as part
of the firewall. If you use a Router, they typically offer to ignore
WAN pings. PING is not a completely reliable protocol because many
devices block it to discourage scans and attacks.

If she has a router then her PC would have a local private address

192.168.x.x
172.16.x.x - 172.31.x.x
10.x.x.x

And the router would hold the Internet address.

Alec <nospam@mydomain.com> wrote:

>I will be trying to sort out a simple problem with a colleague who
>uses Earthlink.
>
>She has three time asked them for her IP address She has been given an
>address 172 xxx xxx xxx. Does not work. Pinged no response.
>
>I have asked her to check with WHAT IS MY IP, as I did for my own and
>she came up with two addresses that did not work. Beginning 66.XXX XXX
>XXX. My guess one could her machine and the other the ISP's address
>for her.
>
>I did a reverse check on the two numbers and they went back to
>Earthlink. The other went back I recal to some address in California
>
>OrgName: Internet Assigned Numbers Authority
>OrgID: IANA
>Address: 4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330
>City: Marina del Rey
>StateProv: CA
>PostalCode: 90292-6695
>Country: US
>
>The other two addresses went back to Earthlink.
>
>OrgName: EarthLink Network, Inc.
>OrgID: ERAD
>Address: 1375 PECHTREE ST, LEVEL A
>City: ATLANTA
>StateProv: GA
>PostalCode: 30309
>Country: US
>
>I reckon some support guy may have got it wrong with the 172 number,
>gave had information to my colleague.
>
>Anyone any kind commens that may harbour a suggestion that will be
>helpful.
>
>Alec
Received on Sun Dec 11 14:24:12 2005