IPv4 blocks owned by virgin media for consumer use

[zekeisaszekedoes]

As the thread title says really, which blocks do VM own? Most of the IPs I've had from them have been in the 82.xxx.xxx.xxx range.

[ileikcaek]

my ip's are usually in the 81.xxx.xxx.xxx range... I am sure once when we were on 10Mb I got an IP 7x.xxx.xxx.xxx although I can't remember the exact ip. You usually see 70's from the USA.

[Toto]

VM own a considerable number of IPv4 net blocks, This will give you a good idea of what they have, but be warned, its a long list.

EDIT: It's worth pointing out that to know exactly how many IP address VM have reserved for end user use is probably not possible, as that information can only be cleaned from VM themselves, and they tend not to share that.

[Ignitionnet]

See attachment.

Needs to be opened with Wordpad or Notepad++.

[Toto]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

See attachment.

Needs to be opened with Wordpad or Notepad++.

I'd respectfully offer that some of those IP's are not assigned to VM.

E.g. 89.127.224.0/23, 94.199.232.0/23, 194.35.72.0/24 and 158.234.251.0/24

[Peter_]

Originally Posted by Toto

I'd respectfully offer that some of those IP's are not assigned to VM.

E.g. 89.127.224.0/23, 94.199.232.0/23, 194.35.72.0/24 and 158.234.251.0/24

Never seen ones starting 89 or 158.

[Nopanic]

Genuine question but why do you care which ranges are VM owned?

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by Toto

I'd respectfully offer that some of those IP's are not assigned to VM.

E.g. 89.127.224.0/23, 94.199.232.0/23, 194.35.72.0/24 and 158.234.251.0/24

I would fully agree - those are just the prefixes that VM were advertising via BGP so some won't be theirs.

That query took about 30 seconds - I'm not going to spend any longer than that on supplying such information so as to filter the advertisements

---------- Post added at 10:36 ---------- Previous post was at 10:33 ----------

Originally Posted by Nopanic

Genuine question but why do you care which ranges are VM owned?

I was wondering when someone would ask 'why'.

Maybe he's going to advertise those prefixes himself null routed and kill your services from some sources?

[Nopanic]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

I would fully agree - those are just the prefixes that VM were advertising via BGP so some won't be theirs.

That query took about 30 seconds - I'm not going to spend any longer than that on supplying such information so as to filter the advertisements

---------- Post added at 10:36 ---------- Previous post was at 10:33 ----------



I was wondering when someone would ask 'why'.

Maybe he's going to advertise those prefixes himself null routed and kill your services from some sources?

[Chrysalis]

they have 81.105.x also

that was my original 30mbit ip that had poor speedio routing, however after my port got upgraded I went back to a 82.x ip.

[Toto]

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

they have 81.105.x also

that was my original 30mbit ip that had poor speedio routing, however after my port got upgraded I went back to a 82.x ip.

That's cover in Ignitionet's list as 81.104.0.0/14.

[zekeisaszekedoes]

Originally Posted by Nopanic

Genuine question but why do you care which ranges are VM owned?

Just curiousity, really. No malicious intent... I just figured they can't only have addresses in the 82.x.x.x and 86.x.x.x range.

[Toto]

Originally Posted by zekeisaszekedoes

Just curiousity, really. No malicious intent... I just figured they can't only have addresses in the 82.x.x.x and 86.x.x.x range.

No indeed, as most of Ignitionnet's list shows.

[Nopanic]

Originally Posted by zekeisaszekedoes

Just curiousity, really. No malicious intent... I just figured they can't only have addresses in the 82.x.x.x and 86.x.x.x range.

Fair enough mate, I just wondered ..