My guess is they use those inside their VPN network. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Feb 8, 2016 9:21 PM, "Ken Hohhof" <af...@kwisp.com> wrote:
> I wonder if this (from the Verizon FAQ) is what they were referring to: > > > Any IP address can be assigned, with the exceptions shown below. If you > assign an IP address within any of the following IP Subnets, you could > experience issues with the Network Extender for Business. It is best to > avoid these IP Subnets: > > - 10.208.110.96/27 > - 10.208.110.96/27 > - 10.210.157.208/28 > - 10.211.28.208/28 > - 10.211.157.208/28 > - 69.78.69.0/24 > > > *From:* Josh Luthman <j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> > *Sent:* Monday, February 08, 2016 5:40 PM > *To:* af@afmug.com > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Verizon "network extender" > > > I have a Samsung that simply gets NAT. Works just fine. It won't start > until it gets GPS which takes way too long sometimes (30-90 minutes). > > Josh Luthman > Office: 937-552-2340 > Direct: 937-552-2343 > 1100 Wayne St > Suite 1337 > Troy, OH 45373 > On Feb 8, 2016 6:34 PM, "Ken Hohhof" <af...@kwisp.com> wrote: > >> What are the typical reasons for these not to work? From the user guide >> it appears to use IPSEC, so I assume anything that prevents a VPN? >> >> Verizon support told the customer they needed a Class A address. WTF? >> Did they maybe mean it *can't* be a class A address? Customer uses >> 10.x.x.x addresses internally, behind Cisco ASA firewall (which I don't >> manage). >> >> I do see some udp/500 and udp/4500 packets, I think that means something >> is using UDP for IPSEC NAT traversal? >> >
