mobile - desktop
Available Now at RodentPro.com!
News & Events:
Posted by Sundberg on March 08, 2002 at 10:52:46:
In Reply to: IP Address mystery solved posted by Raymond Hoser on March 08, 2002 at 07:03:04:
Now, it struck me as somewhat unlikely that WW would post under a pseudonym. Therefore I checked your statements Raymond, and I don't reach the same conclusion you do.
Regarding the post by adder at http://www.kingsnake.com/forum/venom/messages/46080.html
If you look at the source for that page you see the following;
"Entered from ctpp-p-144-134-157-89.prem.tmns.net.au at 22.214.171.124"
This is the data I found about that IP-adress using VisualRoute;
Network Development and
Construction Branch 32 Pirie Street Adelaide
Netblock: 126.96.36.199 - 188.8.131.52"
On the other hand, if one looks at the source for WWs post http://www.kingsnake.com/forum/venom/messages/46055.html you see the following;
"Entered from little-weed.mcc.wwwcache.ja.net at 184.108.40.206"
And this is some of the data that gets thrown up when you check that IP-adress;
"inetnum: 220.127.116.11 - 18.104.22.168
descr: JANET Web Cache Service
You say in your post that "So I did a quick check on the Wois database for the mystery person at:
firstname.lastname@example.org which we all know is a non-existant person and domain."
To begin with, we don't all know that the domain doesn´t exist. Check http://www.adder.com.au/ for yourself... That is an obvious error on your part, very easily checked as well. Hm, what more can be wrong?
Then you go on and list the RIPE-info you retrived for the IP-adress that WW's message contains WHILE CLAIMING IT IS THE ADRESS WHICH ADDER POSTED FROM! But as anyone can see if they bother to check the adresses themselves this is not the case. But most people will hardly check that will they? So you make it seem as if WW posted adders message from GB.
In summary, www.adder.com.au is a valid domain, it is based in Australia, the IP-adress in adders post confirms it was sent from Australia, and the adress in WWs post confirms it was sent from GB.
Care to give an explanation? Maybe I'm mistaken? I'm by no means an expert on the detailed workings of the 'net but this easily checked info seem to contradict what you are saying.
surevsaha at hotmail dot com