Ask HN: What is China doing with 1.1.1.1?

1&#x2F;8 was reserved for a long time and various entities improperly used it as a private address. It was eventually given to APNIC for assignment use but a few ultra-commonly-used ranges and addresses like 1.1.1&#x2F;24 and 1.2.3&#x2F;something were never assigned because they get so much noise traffic and would break so many things.<p>It&#x27;s improper for anything to use these unassigned in-theory-globally-routable addresses but there are no real hosts there and lots of local networks use them for random internal purposes. At least one commercial Wi-Fi hotspot uses 1.1.1.1 as a captive portal address.<p>Here&#x27;s an incredibly detailed report on the situation on the 1-network: <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.potaroo.net&#x2F;studies&#x2F;1slash8&#x2F;1slash8.html" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.potaroo.net&#x2F;studies&#x2F;1slash8&#x2F;1slash8.html</a>

So 1.1.1.0&#x2F;24 doesn&#x27;t seem to be in the global table from North American carrier perspectives. It&#x27;s certainly not a routed prefix for any of my machines in North America. The closest prefix I can see an announcement for on a global basis is 1.1.3.0&#x2F;24 (CHINANET FUJIAN PROVINCE NETWORK).<p>Like bcoates said, there&#x27;s a bunch of dumb stuff out there designed by people who barely understood TCP&#x2F;IP and used non-RFC1918 ranges for customer equipment. Occasionally they leak indirectly into a table that&#x27;s being redistributed into some mom and pop ISP&#x27;s BGP announcements, and this happens. The backbone carriers of the Internet all (well, maybe not tata) have much stronger filters than Honest Achmed&#x27;s used car sales and Internet transit, so they tend to leak only within a country or region.<p>Occasionally its some ISP internal services and it&#x27;s done deliberately to have easy to remember IP addresses for techs working on the network. I mean, do you want to have to remember to point SNMP traps to 216.31.49.167 or would you rather only have to remember 1.1.1.1 instead? Then the prefix hits the border bogon filter and remains entirely with that ISP&#x27;s network.<p>Now that I think about it, scanning ISPs for known unannounced prefixes in the global table would be kind of a fun project to discover all the little internal services ISPs might have squirreled away throughout their network.

Nothing from Shenzhen. From the responses here I think you can rephrase the title &quot;What are (some random provider in Shanghai) doing with 1.1.1.1?&quot; which is borderline irrelevant to everyone, though <i>bcoates</i>&#x27; response was informative. :)

Could you guys please stop ping my router?

my guess is that mobile networks do something with it, or some mobile network equipment do something wierd.<p>I&#x27;m in Norway and it seem that a telenor (Norwegian telco) box respons to it:<p># ping 1.1.1.1 PING 1.1.1.1 (1.1.1.1) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=246 time=67.3 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=246 time=57.9 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=246 time=77.4 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=246 time=76.1 ms<p># traceroute 1.1.1.1 traceroute to 1.1.1.1 (1.1.1.1), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets 1 gateway (192.168.1.1) 1.738 ms 1.746 ms 2.259 ms 2 77.16.1.146.tmi.telenormobil.no (77.16.1.146) 58.505 ms 64.686 ms 64.701 ms 3 10.72.52.250 (10.72.52.250) 64.703 ms 64.684 ms 64.718 ms 4 ti0001a401-ae14-21.ti.telenor.net (193.212.40.13) 71.297 ms 71.320 ms 71.316 ms 5 ti0300c360-ae49-0.ti.telenor.net (146.172.98.241) 87.921 ms 87.927 ms 87.921 ms 6 ti3163c360-ae8-0.ti.telenor.net (146.172.101.194) 87.751 ms 44.302 ms 56.143 ms 7 ti3153c400-ae5-0.ti.telenor.net (146.172.101.221) 56.130 ms 56.133 ms 56.112 ms 8 ti3153d400-ae3-0.ti.telenor.net (146.172.100.82) 62.571 ms 69.241 ms 69.198 ms 9 * * * 10 ti3171a210-xe3-11.ti.telenor.net (146.172.81.102) 68.961 ms * <i>

I&#x27;m also in Shanghai, on a China Telecom hardline, I get nothing from 1.1.1.1:<p>PING 1.1.1.1 (1.1.1.1) 56(84) bytes of data.<p>--- 1.1.1.1 ping statistics --- 80 packets transmitted, 0 received, 100% packet loss, time 79915ms<p>What mobile network are you using?

I am getting response from 1.1.1.1 from Brazil.<p>33 packets transmitted, 33 received, 0% packet loss, time 32051 Ms<p>rtt min&#x2F;avg&#x2F;max&#x2F;mdev = 30.104&#x2F;37.650&#x2F;229.784&#x2F;33.997 ms

In the U.S., near AWS East, and 1.1.1.1 times out.

That&#x27;s funny.<p>I use 1.0.0.0&#x2F;24 for my home network. Perhaps they&#x27;re doing something similar.