$ traceroute fastly.com traceroute: Warning: fastly.com has multiple addresses; using 216.146.46.10 traceroute to fastly.com (216.146.46.10), 64 hops max, 52 byte packets [...] 6 xe-8-1-3.edge4.frankfurt1.level3.net (212.162.25.89) 157.577 ms 158.102 ms 166.088 ms 7 vlan80.csw3.frankfurt1.level3.net (4.69.154.190) 236.032 ms vlan60.csw1.frankfurt1.level3.net (4.69.154.62) 236.247 ms 236.731 ms 8 ae-72-72.ebr2.frankfurt1.level3.net (4.69.140.21) 236.029 ms 236.606 ms ae-62-62.ebr2.frankfurt1.level3.net (4.69.140.17) 236.804 ms 9 ae-22-22.ebr2.london1.level3.net (4.69.148.189) 236.159 ms ae-24-24.ebr2.london1.level3.net (4.69.148.197) 236.017 ms ae-23-23.ebr2.london1.level3.net (4.69.148.193) 236.115 ms 10 ae-42-42.ebr1.newyork1.level3.net (4.69.137.70) 235.838 ms ae-41-41.ebr1.newyork1.level3.net (4.69.137.66) 236.237 ms ae-43-43.ebr1.newyork1.level3.net (4.69.137.74) 235.998 ms 11 ae-91-91.csw4.newyork1.level3.net (4.69.134.78) 235.980 ms ae-81-81.csw3.newyork1.level3.net (4.69.134.74) 236.211 ms 235.548 ms 12 ae-23-70.car3.newyork1.level3.net (4.69.155.69) 236.151 ms 235.730 ms ae-43-90.car3.newyork1.level3.net (4.69.155.197) 235.768 ms 13 dynamic-net.car3.newyork1.level3.net (4.53.90.150) 236.116 ms 236.453 ms 236.565 ms 14 dynamic-net.car3.newyork1.level3.net (4.53.90.150) 237.399 ms !X 236.225 ms !X 235.870 ms !X
Now, that, I thought, was most odd. Why was level3 prohibiting the trace?
I went looking for a support contact at Fastly to try and get anything that could explain what was going on. I found their IRC chat room on FreeNode (I spend a lot of time on FreeNode), and didn’t waste time dropping into it. The kind folks there told me that they’d had reports of one of their IP ranges being null-blocked in Pakistan. It was the 185.31.17.0/24 range. I did some network prodding about, and confirmed that that indeed was the subnet I couldn’t get to from within Pakistan.
$ ping -c 1 185.31.18.133 PING 185.31.18.133 (185.31.18.133): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 185.31.18.133: icmp_seq=0 ttl=55 time=145.194 ms --- 185.31.18.133 ping statistics --- 1 packets transmitted, 1 packets received, 0.0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 145.194/145.194/145.194/0.000 ms $ ping -c 1 185.31.16.133 PING 185.31.16.133 (185.31.16.133): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 185.31.16.133: icmp_seq=0 ttl=51 time=188.872 ms --- 185.31.16.133 ping statistics --- 1 packets transmitted, 1 packets received, 0.0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 188.872/188.872/188.872/0.000 ms $ ping -c 1 185.31.17.133 PING 185.31.17.133 (185.31.17.133): 56 data bytes --- 185.31.17.133 ping statistics --- 1 packets transmitted, 0 packets received, 100.0% packet loss
They also told me they’d had reports of both PTCL and TWA where the range in question was null-routed. They said they didn’t know why it had been null-routed but would appreciate any info the locals could provide.
This is ludicrous. After Wi-Tribe filtering UDP DNS packets to Google’s DNS and OpenDNS servers (which they still do), this is the second absolutely preposterous thing that has pissed me off.