From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: John Haxby Subject: Re: www.adobe.com Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2008 09:30:27 +0000 Message-ID: <491D4533.5030501@oracle.com> References: <20081113075231.50345b2c@gmail.com> <491BFB25.3000800@plouf.fr.eu.org> <20081113105205.7496faf5@gmail.com> <491C0DD8.6080103@plouf.fr.eu.org> <20081113120030.1f039cb6@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20081113120030.1f039cb6@gmail.com> Sender: netfilter-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed" To: TheOldFellow Cc: netfilter@vger.kernel.org TheOldFellow wrote: > On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 12:22:00 +0100 > Pascal Hambourg wrote: > > >> The problem may lie in your router, your network interface card or its >> driver. Anyway it does not seem to be related to netfilter/iptables, as >> tcpdump sees the packet as malformed before it enters the netfilter >> code. Can you try with another router, machine, kernel or network >> interface ? >> > > Yes, but it will take time to arrange. It's very strange that it only > occurs on that range if IP addresses, which are also very similar to > the 192.168.0.0/16 private address range. I wonder if this would > improve if I changed the address range used on the ADSL router - > firewall to, say, 172.20.1.0. If it's software/firmware in the router > or NIC that might avoid it. > It's perhaps not that strange. I had a similar problem a little while ago -- the networks guy had a set of blacklisted addresses in the router that was rather out of date. He blamed his predecessor :-) jch