Unusual IP addy ~ Any Ideas?

[Tassie_Devils]

Hi,

Just having a browse thru my FW logs and came across this IP trying to connect from 137 to me on 137.

4.33.1.98

Any ideas?

This is info I got:
01/27/03 14:30:58 IP block 4.33.1.98
Trying 4.33.1.98 at ARIN
Trying 4.33.1 at ARIN
Genuity GNTY-4-0 (NET-4-0-0-0-1)
4.0.0.0 - 4.255.255.255
GTE Intelligent Network Services GTEINS-33-0-25 (NET-4-33-0-0-1)
4.33.0.0 - 4.33.15.255

# ARIN Whois database, last updated 2003-01-26 20:00
# Enter ? for additional hints on searching ARIN's Whois database.

Not worried, just curious.

[CrazyM]

Hi Tassie_Devils

-{ Quote: "Not worried, just curious." }-

Curious about anything in particular? Some additional info on the IP:

nslookup 4.33.1.98
Canonical name: tamqfl1-ar5-4-33-001-098.tamqfl1.dsl-verizon.net
Addresses:
4.33.1.98

Regards,
CrazyM

[Tassie_Devils]

Hi CrazyM

No, not really, just the fact of the addy's numbers.

I have never seen an addy with those types of numbers before, so low, etc.

Now I may not get around as much as a lot of you guys, so therefore it was unusual in that sense for me.

Thanks for reply. :)

[meneer]

Unusual, somewhat. Initially this is a so called class A network address.
Historically there are only a few of these around and only a few company's own such an address range (IBM being one of them, of course).
As far as I can recall, there are 128 class A networks. As you will know an IP address is 32 bits long. Class A networks use an netid of 7 bits, resulting in 128 networks. Such a network may host more than 16 million hosts (24 bits left of the 32). Class B uses a 14 bit net id, each with 64K hosts, Class C has a 21 bit netid, with 256 host addresses.

But given the scarcity of ip addresses and networks I suppose many of these A- and B- class networks have been split up (someone to clear this up? )

If you use the 10.*.*.* address range on your private lan, you can have as much as 16 million computers on your network :D

[Tassie_Devils]

HI meneer.

Thanks for that enlightening piece of info. :)

Thanks. TAS

[LowWaterMark]

Ah, good old RFC 1918 (previously 1597) regarding the private address ranges... It is worth a read, as many of us connect via ISP based networks that actually assigned us private, "non routable" addresses. (The "non routable" is in quotes because, technically, these addresses can be routed, but are not supposed to be on the public networks. ISP's that don't enforce the RFC's are in my opinion "a problem" ::) )

http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1918.html