|
|
|
|
|
by timmytim
2968 days ago
|
|
I would guess it has something to do with cisco asking them to help alleviate issues with their 1.1.1.1 squatting on a bunch of devices. I tested it when it came out, and if I set my DNS to 1.1.1.1, then logged into a hotel wireless network (that I knew was running those devices), as soon as a request was made, I was logged out of the captive portal. I would have expected 1.1.1.1 to already be blocked if anyone filters on bogon-space (or has dealt with i Is there a database of who blocks what? I searched but didn't find a collection anywhere. Unless we are looking at port 25 and whatnot. Yes, it is not allowing you to use a (not technically)-arbitrary port, but most would agree that the internet is better off for that. |
|
Using unallocated IPs for "internal" or bogus purposes is sketchy, continuing to use them after they are allocated is something else. Especially so nearly a decade on.