[GTER] RES: NET Virtua entregando IPv4 privado?

Vinícius Ferrão vinicius at ferrao.eti.br
Sat May 16 13:56:40 -03 2015 

Pessoal,

Conferi aqui em casa e me parece que o Virtua está me entregando IPv6 e IPv4 Real, confiram:

em0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1500
	options=4009b<RXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,VLAN_HWCSUM,VLAN_HWTSO>
	ether 0c:c4:7a:11:01:8f
	inet6 fe80::ec4:7aff:fe11:18f%em0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x1 
	inet 179.210.144.237 netmask 0xfffff000 broadcast 179.210.159.255 
	inet6 2804:14d:5c90:0:ec4:7aff:fe11:18f prefixlen 64 autoconf 
	nd6 options=23<PERFORMNUD,ACCEPT_RTADV,AUTO_LINKLOCAL>
	media: Ethernet autoselect (1000baseT <full-duplex>)
	status: active

Legal que tentei fazer uns testes com IPv6 e nada funcionou, sequer um ping6.

Talvez eu possa ser a "próxima vítima" com 100.64/10.

Abraços,

> On May 15, 2015, at 10:27 AM, Rafael Possamai <rafael at gav.ufsc.br> wrote:
> 
> Proxima vez eu vou alugar um apartamento do lado do datacenter e colocar
> uma ponte wireless no meu barraco! rs
> 
> 2015-05-14 19:15 GMT-05:00 Luis Marks <luismarks at gmail.com>:
> 
>> Obrigado Vinicius, vou tentar seguindo essa linha.
>> 
>> Abraço!
>> 
>> ____________________
>> Luis Marks
>> Em 14/05/2015 18:45, "Vinícius Fontes" <contato at viniciusfontes.com>
>> escreveu:
>> 
>>> Essa aqui foi a mensagem que eu enviei para a NET. Veja se isso te ajuda:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> *Boa tarde. Notei que a NET disponibilza acesso à Internet tanto
>>> por IPv6 quanto por IPv4. O acesso IPv6 costuma estar bastante instável.
>>> Isso se nota por lentidão extrema ou impossibilidade de acessar sites que
>>> já implementam IPv6, como Google, Youtube, Facebook e Instagram. É
>> possível
>>> notar que o problema ocorre só nos acessos em IPv6 pois ao desativar este
>>> protocolo o problema deixa de ocorrer. Além disso, notei que o DHCP da
>> NET
>>> não está entregando um IPv4 público, e sim um privado. Por exemplo, neste
>>> momento o IPv4 da WAN do meu roteador é 100.64.194.28. Segundo a IANA, o
>>> bloco IPv4 100.64.0.0/10 <http://100.64.0.0/10> é reservado para uso em
>>> CGNAT (Carrier-Grade NAT) e portanto não é publicamente roteável. Também
>>> nesse instante, ao tentar detectar meu IPv4 público através do
>>> site meuip.com.br <http://meuip.com.br/>, o endereço reportado é
>>> 201.37.163.232, o que confirma a utilização de NAT. Como sou Tecnólogo em
>>> Sistemas para Internet e trabalho a partir da minha residência (em regime
>>> home office), as vezes é necessário disponibilizar acesso a um dos meus
>>> dispositivos para que os colegas ou clientes realizem testes. Como não
>>> recebo um IPv4 público, isso se torna impossível, e dificulta bastante
>> meu
>>> trabalho. Sei que é possível acessar os dispositivos via IPv6, mas
>>> infelizmente a adoção deste protocolo ainda é muito pequena: até hoje, só
>>> vi a NET disponibilizando IPv6, e nenhum outro provedor. Com isso
>> exposto,
>>> gostaria de verificar se existe a possibilidade de receber um endereço
>> IPv4
>>> público e dinâmico, pois isso facilitaria muito o meu trabalho. Deixo
>> claro
>>> que meu objetivo não é, de forma alguma, rodar servidores web ou
>> quaisquer
>>> outros em caráter permanente. Desde já agradeço a atenção recebida, e
>> estou
>>> à disposição para dirimir quaisquer dúvidas.*
>>> 
>>> Em 14 de maio de 2015 14:20, Luis Marks <luismarks at gmail.com> escreveu:
>>> 
>>>> Eu tinha visto sua descrição e fiz duas tentativas no Fale Conosco, na
>>>> opção de IPV6 (assuntos técnicos). Dá uma olhada nas duas tentativas:
>>>> 
>>>> Primeira tentativa:
>>>> 
>>>> Q: Eu sai da operadora GVT e migrei para a NET essa semana, mas notei
>>> que o
>>>> Virtua não tem um IPV4 publico (utiliza NAT). Gostaria de ver a
>>>> possibilidade de alterar essa configuração em meu acesso e passar ele
>>> para
>>>> IPV4 publico.
>>>> 
>>>> A: Prezado cliente,
>>>> Recebemos seu e-mail através do fale conosco,informamos que a Net
>>> trabalha
>>>> com IPV4 porém não o publico a Net disponibiliza o  Wi-Fi publico. para
>>>> mais informação entre em contato na nossa central de relacionamento
>> Net.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Segunda tentativa (mudei um pouco o texto):
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Q: Eu sai da operadora GVT e migrei para a NET essa semana, mas notei
>>> que o
>>>> Virtua não tem IP real na WAN do cable modem (utiliza NAT). Gostaria de
>>> ver
>>>> a possibilidade de alterar essa configuração em meu acesso e passar ele
>>>> para IP real. Caso não seja possível vou ter que avaliar a
>> possibilidade
>>> de
>>>> cancelar a NET e voltar pra GVT, que tem IP real na WAN. Peço que me
>>> liguem
>>>> caso tenham duvidas da minha necessidade.
>>>> 
>>>> A: Recebemos o seu e-mail através do Fale Conosco, venho através deste
>>>> informá-lo que a mudança de IP está disponível apenas para empresas,
>> para
>>>> mais informações por gentileza entre em contato com a Central de
>>>> Relacionamento NET 10621.
>>>> 
>>>> ____________________________________
>>>> Luis Marks
>>>> 
>>>> 2015-05-14 11:25 GMT-03:00 Vinícius Fontes <contato at viniciusfontes.com
>>> :
>>>> 
>>>>> Por telefone realmente não vão entender. No Fale Conosco, tem que
>>>>> selecionar a opção de IPv6, conforme eu descrevi aqui:
>>>>> 
>>>>> *Mandei um email através do formulário no site da NET (Fale Conosco,
>>>>> selecionei serviço de banda larga, assuntos técnicos/IPv6)
>> solicitando
>>> se
>>>>> existe possibilidade de me disponibilizar um IPv4 público. Minutos
>>> depois
>>>>> de enviar o email recebi uma ligação de um técnico querendo entender
>> a
>>>>> minha necessidade, e confirmando que a NET realmente faz CGNAT (eles
>>>> chamam
>>>>> internamente de IP-NAT). Expliquei que trabalho em regime de home
>>> office
>>>> e
>>>>> que colegas e clientes precisam acessar meus dispositivos
>> remotamente.
>>>>> Deixei claro que minha intenção não é rodar um servidor web ou
>> qualquer
>>>>> outro em caráter permanente. Ele me pareceu convencido e disse que ia
>>>>> encaminhar a solicitação para o pessoal do datacenter, e que em 48h
>>> devo
>>>>> receber um retorno. Para registro, estou em Porto Alegre.*
>>>>> 
>>>>> *Fica aí a dica para quem também caiu no CGNAT. Pelo menos comigo
>> foram
>>>>> muito atenciosos.*
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Em 14 de maio de 2015 09:54, Psychoferno <psychoferno at gmail.com>
>>>> escreveu:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Assinei a NET em Porto Alegre e acabei caindo nessa de CGNAT.
>> Acabei
>>>>>> encontrando a confirmação nesse tópico do grupo. Tentei no
>>> atendimento
>>>>>> telefônico e no fale conosco, mas a NET não quer alterar a
>> estrutura
>>> do
>>>>> meu
>>>>>> Virtua. Na verdade nem entendem o que estou pedindo, pois alguns
>>> acham
>>>>> que
>>>>>> querem IP fixo e outros respondem que posso usar o WIFI da NET
>> (tudo
>>> a
>>>>>> ver). Minha ultima tentativa foi a ouvidoria, mas não acho que vá
>>>>> adiantar.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Para não ficar sem acesso aos micros em casa acabei tendo de fazer
>> um
>>>> ssh
>>>>>> reverso, mas acho que esse CGNAT deve trazer todos os problemas de
>> um
>>>>> NAPT
>>>>>> normal.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Agradeço as informações que postaram aqui nesse tópico.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> _______________________
>>>>>> Luis Marks
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 2015-04-30 11:27 GMT-03:00 Douglas Fischer <
>> fischerdouglas at gmail.com
>>>> :
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Ter "trocentos" blocos não significa muita coisa...
>>>>>>> Tens que analisar quantos ips REALMENTE ocupados eles tem.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> E, sinceramente, pelo relatado pelo colega Vinicius, acho que
>> eles
>>>>> estão
>>>>>>> fazendo as tarefas de casa bem bonitinho...
>>>>>>> Se todos andasem assim, poderíamos dizer que até 2025 estaríamos
>>> com
>>>>> 90%
>>>>>> da
>>>>>>> migração para IPv6 feita.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Em 29 de abril de 2015 16:38, Rafael Possamai <
>> rafael at gav.ufsc.br>
>>>>>>> escreveu:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Nao eh a NET um dos maiores ASes do mundo? Por que regulam
>> tanto
>>>>> ipv4?
>>>>>> Eu
>>>>>>>> sei que esta acabando, mas eles tem trocentos blocos
>> registrados.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 2015-04-29 9:00 GMT-05:00 Vinícius Fontes <
>>>>> contato at viniciusfontes.com
>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Ainda ontem me ligaram pedindo para que eu fizesse um
>> release e
>>>>> renew
>>>>>>> na
>>>>>>>>> WAN do roteador, e agora sim tenho IPv4 público!
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Em 28 de abril de 2015 15:28, Vinícius Fontes <
>>>>>>>> contato at viniciusfontes.com>
>>>>>>>>> escreveu:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Concordo, mas entendo o lado deles também. Não querem ter
>> que
>>>> dar
>>>>>>>> suporte
>>>>>>>>>> a um ambiente empresarial em um contrato residencial. Pelo
>>>> menos
>>>>>> acho
>>>>>>>>> que é
>>>>>>>>>> por isso.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Em 28 de abril de 2015 15:10, Fernando Frediani <
>>>>>>> fhfrediani at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>> escreveu:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Mesmo se você desejasse rodar um servidor web ou qualquer
>>>> outro
>>>>> em
>>>>>>>>>>> caráter permanente não deveria ser um óbice para solicitar
>>> ou
>>>>> ter
>>>>>> um
>>>>>>>> IP
>>>>>>>>>>> público.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Obrigado por compartilhar a informação.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Fernando
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> On 28/04/2015 14:26, Vinícius Fontes wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Novidades nesse caso!
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Mandei um email através do formulário no site da NET
>> (Fale
>>>>>> Conosco,
>>>>>>>>>>>> selecionei serviço de banda larga, assuntos
>> técnicos/IPv6)
>>>>>>>> solicitando
>>>>>>>>> se
>>>>>>>>>>>> existe possibilidade de me disponibilizar um IPv4
>> público.
>>>>>> Minutos
>>>>>>>>> depois
>>>>>>>>>>>> de enviar o email recebi uma ligação de um técnico
>> querendo
>>>>>>> entender
>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>>>> minha necessidade, e confirmando que a NET realmente faz
>>>> CGNAT
>>>>>>> (eles
>>>>>>>>>>>> chamam
>>>>>>>>>>>> internamente de IP-NAT). Expliquei que trabalho em regime
>>> de
>>>>> home
>>>>>>>>> office
>>>>>>>>>>>> e
>>>>>>>>>>>> que colegas e clientes precisam acessar meus dispositivos
>>>>>>>> remotamente.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Deixei claro que minha intenção não é rodar um servidor
>> web
>>>> ou
>>>>>>>> qualquer
>>>>>>>>>>>> outro em caráter permanente. Ele me pareceu convencido e
>>>> disse
>>>>>> que
>>>>>>> ia
>>>>>>>>>>>> encaminhar a solicitação para o pessoal do datacenter, e
>>> que
>>>> em
>>>>>> 48h
>>>>>>>>> devo
>>>>>>>>>>>> receber um retorno. Para registro, estou em Porto Alegre.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Fica aí a dica para quem também caiu no CGNAT. Pelo menos
>>>>> comigo
>>>>>>>> foram
>>>>>>>>>>>> muito atenciosos.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Em 23 de abril de 2015 21:21, Carlos Ribeiro <
>>>>>>>> cribeiro at telbrax.com.br>
>>>>>>>>>>>> escreveu:
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> A operadora é obrigada a manter log das traduções, a
>> nível
>>>> de
>>>>>>> porta
>>>>>>>>>>>>> (obviamente). É um dos grandes presos de investir em
>>> CGNAT.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Carlos Ribeiro
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Em 23/04/2015 16:12, "Marcos Diego" <
>>>> marcos at turbonetbr.com.br
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> escreveu:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Então,,,,esta é a pergunta que estou me fazendo desde
>> que
>>>>>> começou
>>>>>>>>> este
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> assunto aqui,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -----Mensagem original-----
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> De: gter-bounces at eng.registro.br [mailto:
>>>>>>>>> gter-bounces at eng.registro.br]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Em
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nome de Rafael Possamai
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enviada em: quinta-feira, 23 de abril de 2015 15:42
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Para: Grupo de Trabalho de Engenharia e Operacao de
>> Redes
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Assunto: Re: [GTER] NET Virtua entregando IPv4 privado?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Se alguem abusar algum website e for bloqueado, poderia
>>>>>> derrubar
>>>>>>>>> junto
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> um
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bairro inteiro de assinantes, eh comum isso?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2015-04-23 13:12 GMT-05:00 Francisco Paletta <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> francisco at assembler.com.br
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Isso depende exclusivamente da rede física/virtual.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Se há uma isolação (ex. vlan) entre um grupo de IPs
>>> CGNAT
>>>>> que
>>>>>>>>> utiliza
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> um
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IP
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real e outro grupo CGNAT que utiliza outro IP real,
>>> essas
>>>>>> redes
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "virtuais"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> podem estar na mesma área. Você pode, por exemplo, ter
>>> um
>>>>>>> vizinho
>>>>>>>>> que
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> também assina a NET e ter o mesmo IP 10.64.x.x que
>>>> ele.....
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Da mesma forma, uma empresa tipo a NET poderia muito
>> bem
>>>>>>> utilizar
>>>>>>>>> toda
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> classe 10.64/10 no Brasil inteiro traduzido em um único
>>> IP
>>>>> real
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (sabemos
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> que praticamente não é possível pela divisão de portas
>>>> entre
>>>>> os
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "clientes").
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mas assim percebemos que as redes CGNAT não tem
>> qualquer
>>>>>>>> dependência
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> da
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> topologia física.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Além do mais é sugerido que se tenha "o menor número
>> de
>>>>>> clientes
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> possíveis
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> em CGNAT associados a um IP real"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Francisco Paletta
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Especialista em Redes e Telecomunicações
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (11)99595-0950
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Em 23 de abril de 2015 14:34, Rafael Possamai <
>>>>>>> rafael at gav.ufsc.br
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> escreveu:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Toda vez que um pacote sai da rede da NET, ele eh
>>>>> traduzido,
>>>>>>>> entao
>>>>>>>>> se
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> passa
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> de NET para EBT, deveria haver um HOP com IP publico,
>>>> pois
>>>>> eu
>>>>>>>> diria
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> que
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> eh
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seguro assumir que as redes da NET e EBT sao
>> separadas.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2015-04-23 10:26 GMT-05:00 Fernando Frediani <
>>>>>>>> fhfrediani at gmail.com
>>>>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Percebi algo a mais com relação co CGNAT.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tenho NET Virtua aqui em Campinas (IP Público por
>>> ora) e
>>>>>>>> imaginei
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> que
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> os
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enderecamento do CGNAT (100.64.0.0/10) seriam
>>>> alcançáveis
>>>>>>> dentro
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> backbone do mesmo provedor mas parece que não são.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fazendo um traceroute pra algum desses endereços nao
>>>> vai a
>>>>>>> lugar
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> algum.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Na
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> verdade após uns 3 hops ja cai na rede da Embratel
>> que
>>>> em
>>>>>>>> teoria é
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> outra
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> empresa e outra rede.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Acredito que as redes locais da NET nas cidades não
>>> são
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> interligadas
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> e
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> talvez por enquanto a 'alcançabilidade' de endereços
>> do
>>>>> CGNAT
>>>>>> se
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> restrinja
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> apenas a nível local. Alguém mais confirma ?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fernando
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 23/04/2015 10:31, Eduardo Schoedler wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pessoal,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Apesar do meu cable modem estar recebendo um ip
>>> público
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (201.37.173.x),
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> olha o que acontece com faço um traceroute:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> C:\Users\Eduardo>tracert 8.8.8.8
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rastreando a rota para
>>> google-public-dns-a.google.com
>>>>>>>> [8.8.8.8]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> com no máximo 30 saltos:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    1     2 ms     1 ms     1 ms  192.168.0.1
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    2    10 ms    10 ms    10 ms  10.35.128.1
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    3    29 ms     9 ms     9 ms
>>>> c915c007.virtua.com.br
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [201.21.192.7]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    4    10 ms    19 ms    10 ms
>>> c915c001.virtua.com.br
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [201.21.192.1]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Já deram uma mascarada... tem um salto (2, com ip
>>>>> 10.x.x.x)
>>>>>>> que
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> não
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> devia
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> estar acontecendo pelo ip que meu modem recebeu.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Acho que cai também no CGNAT... =/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eduardo Schoedler
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Em 22 de abril de 2015 20:27, Eduardo Schoedler <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> listas at esds.com.br
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> escreveu:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  Ontem a noite eu reiniciei meu modem da NET
>> (POA) e
>>>>>>> continuei
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pegando
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IP
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> público... acho que não vou reiniciar mais ele
>> heheh.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eduardo Schoedler
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Em 22 de abril de 2015 19:52, Fernando Frediani <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fhfrediani at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> escreveu:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  Estou vendo nessa história de CGNAT uma
>>> oportunidade
>>>>> de
>>>>>>>>> negócio
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> surgindo
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dependendo da criatividade do pessoal de produtos:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Adquira aqui seu IP público e sem filtros." ou
>>>>> "Compre 5
>>>>>>> IPs
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> públicos e
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pague 4".
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Me lembro quando morava na Itália a uns 9 anos
>>> atras
>>>>>> usava
>>>>>>>>> banda
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> larga
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> de
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> uma operadora grande que tinha uma rede de
>> fibras a
>>>>> nivel
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nacional
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> porém
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dava apenas IPs privados para todos os usuários
>>>>> residenciais
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (nem
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> era
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> o
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> endereçamento /10 do CGNAT). Aqueles que desejassem
>>>> podiam
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "comprar"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> um
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1:1
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> NAT.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Outra "oportunidade" talvez seja os clientes
>> terem
>>>> que
>>>>>>>>> contratar
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obrigatóriamente conexões do mesmo provedor X
>> pois
>>>> caso
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contrário
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> determinadas aplicações peer to peer não funcionarão.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Moreiras - Existe alguma obrigatoriedade do
>>>> cumprimento
>>>>>> de
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> algums
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dos
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> itens
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> desse relatório por parte da operadora e
>> provedores
>>>> ? E
>>>>>>> mesmo
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> que
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> haja
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> como
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ficaria esse "caso haja disponibilidade" ?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fernando
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 22 Apr 2015 17:47, "Antonio M. Moreiras" <
>>>>>>> moreiras at nic.br
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  Segundo o relatório [1] do grupo de trabalho da
>>> Anatel,
>>>>>>> existe
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> opção
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> de fallback para um IP público. Seria bom saber se
>>> está
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> funcionando
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> na
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> prática:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pag 10, item 3.4: "IPv4 Fallback:  Se um usuário
>>> não
>>>>>> puder
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (devido
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> incompatibilidades de seus equipamentos ou
>> aplicações)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trabalhar
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> um
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IPv4 compartilhado, caso haja disponibilidade, ele
>>>> poderá
>>>>>>> optar
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> por
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> um
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IPv4 público dinâmico não oneroso (fallback) ou por
>> um
>>>>> IPv4
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fixo
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> de
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> forma onerosa (oferta atual).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pag 15, item 5.2: "Ademais, a partir de
>>> junho/2015,
>>>>> nas
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> localidades
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> onde
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> não houver oferta de IPv6 nativo, devido à
>>>> necessidade
>>>>>> de
>>>>>>>>> troca
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> de
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> elementos legados, a prestadora deverá alocar ao
>>> usuário,
>>>> de
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> forma
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dinâmica ou fixa, um endereço IPv4 público (sem
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> compartilhamento)"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>> http://www.anatel.gov.br/Portal/verificaDocumentos/documento.asp?numeroPublicacao=325769&assuntoPublicacao=Relat%F3rio%20de%20Atividades%20do%20GT-IPv6%20-%20Grupo%20de%20Trabalho%20para%20Implanta%E7%E3o%20do%20Protocolo%20IPv6%20na%20rede%20das%20Prestadoras%20de%20Telecomunica%E7%F5es.&caminhoRel=null&filtro=1&documentoPath=325769.pdf
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> []s
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Moreiras.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 22/04/15 16:46, Fabiano Roberto Linhares
>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Aqui em Floripa ocorre o mesmo.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> O ip que entregam aqui é 100.64.192.211.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Se tem um DVR e precisa acessar remoto só vai
>>>>> conseguir
>>>>>>> de
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dentro
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> da
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rede da NET.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IPV6 ainda não esta operacional aqui.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> []´s
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fabiano
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 20/04/2015 15:40, Vinícius Fontes wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Boa tarde pessoal. Se esse não é o escopo da
>>>> lista,
>>>>>> peço
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> desculpas
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> desde já.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tenho um link residencial do NET Virtua em
>> Porto
>>>>>> Alegre
>>>>>>> e
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> notei
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> que o
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> endereço IP que recebo na interface (com o modem em
>>>>> bridge)
>>>>>> é
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> algo
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> como
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 100.66.197.55.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Uma pesquisa rápida no whois diz que o bloco
>>>>>>> 100.64.0.0/10
>>>>>>>> é
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reservado
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> na
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IANA, e esse comentário no retorno da pesquisa
>> me
>>>>>> chamou
>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> atenção:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Comment:        This block is used as Shared Address
>>>> Space.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Traffic
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> these addresses does not come from IANA. IANA
>> has
>>>>> simply
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reserved
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> these
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> numbers in its database and does not use or
>>> operate
>>>>>> them.
>>>>>>> We
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> source of activity you may see on logs or in
>>> e-mail
>>>>>>> records.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> refer
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to http://www.iana.org/abuse/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Comment:        Shared Address Space can only
>> be
>>>>> used
>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Service
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Provider
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> networks or on routing equipment that is able
>> to
>>> do
>>>>>>> address
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> translation
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> across router interfaces when addresses are
>>>> identical
>>>>> on
>>>>>>> two
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> different
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> interfaces.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ou seja, no meu entendimento, a NET está
>>> entregando
>>>>> IPs
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> privados
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> e
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fazendo
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> NAT ao invés de entregar IPs públicos
>>>> (provavelmente
>>>>>> por
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> esgotamento), é
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> isso mesmo? Ou isso é falha minha em deixar o
>>> modem
>>>> em
>>>>>>> modo
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bridge
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> e
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> esse
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> endereço está sendo fornecido pelo DHCP do
>>> próprio
>>>>>> modem
>>>>>>>> (que
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> eu
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> desativei,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a princípio, mas...)?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gter list
>>>>>>>> https://eng.registro.br/mailman/listinfo/gter
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gter list
>>>>>>> https://eng.registro.br/mailman/listinfo/gter
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gter list
>>>>>> https://eng.registro.br/mailman/listinfo/gter
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eduardo Schoedler
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gter list
>>>>> https://eng.registro.br/mailman/listinfo/gter
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gter list
>>>> https://eng.registro.br/mailman/listinfo/gter
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gter list
>>>> https://eng.registro.br/mailman/listinfo/gter
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gter list
>>> https://eng.registro.br/mailman/listinfo/gter
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gter list
>>> https://eng.registro.br/mailman/listinfo/gter
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>> gter list
>>> https://eng.registro.br/mailman/listinfo/gter
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>> gter list
>> https://eng.registro.br/mailman/listinfo/gter
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> gter list
>> https://eng.registro.br/mailman/listinfo/gter
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> gter list    https://eng.registro.br/mailman/listinfo/gter
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> gter list    https://eng.registro.br/mailman/listinfo/gter
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Douglas Fernando Fischer
>>>>>>> Engº de Controle e Automação
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> gter list    https://eng.registro.br/mailman/listinfo/gter
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> gter list    https://eng.registro.br/mailman/listinfo/gter
>>>>>> 
>>>>> --
>>>>> gter list    https://eng.registro.br/mailman/listinfo/gter
>>>> --
>>>> gter list    https://eng.registro.br/mailman/listinfo/gter
>>>> 
>>> --
>>> gter list    https://eng.registro.br/mailman/listinfo/gter
>> --
>> gter list    https://eng.registro.br/mailman/listinfo/gter
>> 
> --
> gter list    https://eng.registro.br/mailman/listinfo/gter

More information about the gter mailing list