Unused IP On Static Network is Pingable

Discussion in 'Computer Security' started by Deb, Aug 27, 2008.

  1. Deb

    Deb Guest

    I run an old school NT server w/ about half a dozen windows and
    linux boxes on my home LAN. All hard wired with static IP's.

    I was just going through my router logs (linksys befsr41 v3 w/
    updated firmware) and I noticed packets to and from IP
    192.168.0.200. This IP is assigned to my network printer but
    that printer is currently disconnected. I pinged the IP and
    got replies!

    As an aside, I also notice that some times the zonealarm
    firewalls on my windoze machines will flag spooler sub system
    for trying to access the internet zone. This usually happens
    when I connect to a share on another machine. All my machines
    are in the trusted zone (private ip block 192.168.0.0 -
    192.168.0.256) so I see no need for the spooler to look else
    where.

    To top it all off, I also noticed that my routers DMZ was set
    to the same IP (192.168.0.200) I recently set on of my boxes up
    in the DMZ for some temporary torrent downloads (legal linux
    distos) but the 192.168.0.200 ip was not the one I set up!

    I disabled DMZ and rebooted the router but was still able to
    ping the 192.168.0.200 address for over an hour before it
    finally stopped responding.

    I don't have a clue about why a device would respond to pings
    when it is not even connected to the LAN nor why my DMZ address
    would be automagically changed so I am assuming that somethings
    been hacked. I can't find anything on the boxes, no rootkits,
    spyware, virus's etc.

    I know zonealarms not the best but I don't have cash to buy
    anything better especially for NT server. Nevertheless, I
    haven't had a problem with this set up in over six years. Any
    ideas?

    Thanks in advance,

    Deb
     
    Deb, Aug 27, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Deb

    Jim Watt Guest

    On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 04:10:28 GMT, Deb <> wrote:

    >I run an old school NT server w/ about half a dozen windows and
    >linux boxes on my home LAN. All hard wired with static IP's.
    >
    >I was just going through my router logs (linksys befsr41 v3 w/
    >updated firmware) and I noticed packets to and from IP
    >192.168.0.200. This IP is assigned to my network printer but
    >that printer is currently disconnected. I pinged the IP and
    >got replies!
    >
    >As an aside, I also notice that some times the zonealarm
    >firewalls on my windoze machines will flag spooler sub system
    >for trying to access the internet zone. This usually happens
    >when I connect to a share on another machine. All my machines
    >are in the trusted zone (private ip block 192.168.0.0 -
    >192.168.0.256) so I see no need for the spooler to look else
    >where.
    >
    >To top it all off, I also noticed that my routers DMZ was set
    >to the same IP (192.168.0.200) I recently set on of my boxes up
    >in the DMZ for some temporary torrent downloads (legal linux
    >distos) but the 192.168.0.200 ip was not the one I set up!
    >
    >I disabled DMZ and rebooted the router but was still able to
    >ping the 192.168.0.200 address for over an hour before it
    >finally stopped responding.
    >
    >I don't have a clue about why a device would respond to pings
    >when it is not even connected to the LAN nor why my DMZ address
    >would be automagically changed so I am assuming that somethings
    >been hacked. I can't find anything on the boxes, no rootkits,
    >spyware, virus's etc.
    >
    >I know zonealarms not the best but I don't have cash to buy
    >anything better especially for NT server. Nevertheless, I
    >haven't had a problem with this set up in over six years. Any
    >ideas?



    192.168.x.x

    is not going anywhere over the Internet because its a non
    routable block. You should have run tracert which may
    have been interesting.

    DMZ's are best avoided.
    --
    Jim Watt
    http://www.gibnet.com
     
    Jim Watt, Aug 27, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Deb

    Jim Watt Guest

    On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 04:10:28 GMT, Deb <> wrote:

    >I run an old school NT server w/ about half a dozen windows and
    >linux boxes on my home LAN. All hard wired with static IP's.
    >
    >I was just going through my router logs (linksys befsr41 v3 w/
    >updated firmware) and I noticed packets to and from IP
    >192.168.0.200. This IP is assigned to my network printer but
    >that printer is currently disconnected. I pinged the IP and
    >got replies!
    >
    >As an aside, I also notice that some times the zonealarm
    >firewalls on my windoze machines will flag spooler sub system
    >for trying to access the internet zone. This usually happens
    >when I connect to a share on another machine. All my machines
    >are in the trusted zone (private ip block 192.168.0.0 -
    >192.168.0.256) so I see no need for the spooler to look else
    >where.
    >
    >To top it all off, I also noticed that my routers DMZ was set
    >to the same IP (192.168.0.200) I recently set on of my boxes up
    >in the DMZ for some temporary torrent downloads (legal linux
    >distos) but the 192.168.0.200 ip was not the one I set up!
    >
    >I disabled DMZ and rebooted the router but was still able to
    >ping the 192.168.0.200 address for over an hour before it
    >finally stopped responding.
    >
    >I don't have a clue about why a device would respond to pings
    >when it is not even connected to the LAN nor why my DMZ address
    >would be automagically changed so I am assuming that somethings
    >been hacked. I can't find anything on the boxes, no rootkits,
    >spyware, virus's etc.
    >
    >I know zonealarms not the best but I don't have cash to buy
    >anything better especially for NT server. Nevertheless, I
    >haven't had a problem with this set up in over six years. Any
    >ideas?



    192.168.x.x

    is not going anywhere over the Internet because its a non
    routable block. You should have run tracert which may
    have been interesting.

    DMZ's are best avoided.
    --
    Jim Watt
    http://www.gibnet.com
     
    Jim Watt, Aug 27, 2008
    #3
  4. Deb

    Ari Guest

    On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 04:10:28 GMT, Deb wrote:

    > I run an old school NT server w/ about half a dozen windows and
    > linux boxes on my home LAN. All hard wired with static IP's.
    >
    > I was just going through my router logs (linksys befsr41 v3 w/
    > updated firmware) and I noticed packets to and from IP
    > 192.168.0.200. This IP is assigned to my network printer but
    > that printer is currently disconnected. I pinged the IP and
    > got replies!
    >
    > As an aside, I also notice that some times the zonealarm
    > firewalls on my windoze machines will flag spooler sub system
    > for trying to access the internet zone. This usually happens
    > when I connect to a share on another machine. All my machines
    > are in the trusted zone (private ip block 192.168.0.0 -
    > 192.168.0.256) so I see no need for the spooler to look else
    > where.
    >
    > To top it all off, I also noticed that my routers DMZ was set
    > to the same IP (192.168.0.200) I recently set on of my boxes up
    > in the DMZ for some temporary torrent downloads (legal linux
    > distos) but the 192.168.0.200 ip was not the one I set up!
    >
    > I disabled DMZ and rebooted the router but was still able to
    > ping the 192.168.0.200 address for over an hour before it
    > finally stopped responding.
    >
    > I don't have a clue about why a device would respond to pings
    > when it is not even connected to the LAN nor why my DMZ address
    > would be automagically changed so I am assuming that somethings
    > been hacked. I can't find anything on the boxes, no rootkits,
    > spyware, virus's etc.
    >
    > I know zonealarms not the best but I don't have cash to buy
    > anything better especially for NT server. Nevertheless, I
    > haven't had a problem with this set up in over six years. Any
    > ideas?
    >
    > Thanks in advance,
    >
    > Deb


    Are you MAC filtering?
    --
    http://www.bushflash.com/idiot.html
     
    Ari, Aug 27, 2008
    #4
  5. Deb

    Ari Guest

    On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 04:10:28 GMT, Deb wrote:

    > I run an old school NT server w/ about half a dozen windows and
    > linux boxes on my home LAN. All hard wired with static IP's.
    >
    > I was just going through my router logs (linksys befsr41 v3 w/
    > updated firmware) and I noticed packets to and from IP
    > 192.168.0.200. This IP is assigned to my network printer but
    > that printer is currently disconnected. I pinged the IP and
    > got replies!
    >
    > As an aside, I also notice that some times the zonealarm
    > firewalls on my windoze machines will flag spooler sub system
    > for trying to access the internet zone. This usually happens
    > when I connect to a share on another machine. All my machines
    > are in the trusted zone (private ip block 192.168.0.0 -
    > 192.168.0.256) so I see no need for the spooler to look else
    > where.
    >
    > To top it all off, I also noticed that my routers DMZ was set
    > to the same IP (192.168.0.200) I recently set on of my boxes up
    > in the DMZ for some temporary torrent downloads (legal linux
    > distos) but the 192.168.0.200 ip was not the one I set up!
    >
    > I disabled DMZ and rebooted the router but was still able to
    > ping the 192.168.0.200 address for over an hour before it
    > finally stopped responding.
    >
    > I don't have a clue about why a device would respond to pings
    > when it is not even connected to the LAN nor why my DMZ address
    > would be automagically changed so I am assuming that somethings
    > been hacked. I can't find anything on the boxes, no rootkits,
    > spyware, virus's etc.
    >
    > I know zonealarms not the best but I don't have cash to buy
    > anything better especially for NT server. Nevertheless, I
    > haven't had a problem with this set up in over six years. Any
    > ideas?
    >
    > Thanks in advance,
    >
    > Deb


    Are you MAC filtering?
    --
    http://www.bushflash.com/idiot.html
     
    Ari, Aug 27, 2008
    #5
  6. Deb

    Deb Guest

    Ari <> wrote in
    news::

    > On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 04:10:28 GMT, Deb wrote:
    >
    >> I run an old school NT server w/ about half a dozen windows and
    >> linux boxes on my home LAN. All hard wired with static IP's.
    >>
    >> I was just going through my router logs (linksys befsr41 v3 w/
    >> updated firmware) and I noticed packets to and from IP
    >> 192.168.0.200. This IP is assigned to my network printer but
    >> that printer is currently disconnected. I pinged the IP and
    >> got replies!
    >>
    >> As an aside, I also notice that some times the zonealarm
    >> firewalls on my windoze machines will flag spooler sub system
    >> for trying to access the internet zone. This usually happens
    >> when I connect to a share on another machine. All my machines
    >> are in the trusted zone (private ip block 192.168.0.0 -
    >> 192.168.0.256) so I see no need for the spooler to look else
    >> where.
    >>
    >> To top it all off, I also noticed that my routers DMZ was set
    >> to the same IP (192.168.0.200) I recently set on of my boxes up
    >> in the DMZ for some temporary torrent downloads (legal linux
    >> distos) but the 192.168.0.200 ip was not the one I set up!
    >>
    >> I disabled DMZ and rebooted the router but was still able to
    >> ping the 192.168.0.200 address for over an hour before it
    >> finally stopped responding.
    >>
    >> I don't have a clue about why a device would respond to pings
    >> when it is not even connected to the LAN nor why my DMZ address
    >> would be automagically changed so I am assuming that somethings
    >> been hacked. I can't find anything on the boxes, no rootkits,
    >> spyware, virus's etc.
    >>
    >> I know zonealarms not the best but I don't have cash to buy
    >> anything better especially for NT server. Nevertheless, I
    >> haven't had a problem with this set up in over six years. Any
    >> ideas?
    >>
    >> Thanks in advance,
    >>
    >> Deb

    >
    > Are you MAC filtering?



    No MAC filtering here, I change hardware fairly often and it just adds
    one
    more thing to keep track of. BTW, 6-10 machines is a bit overkill for 2
    users. So, I strive to keep a balance between security and convienence.


    >192.168.x.x


    >is not going anywhere over the Internet because its a non
    >routable block. You should have run tracert which may
    >have been interesting.


    Of course, 192.168.x.x is not routable thats why we use it for internal,
    right? :) I will run a trace route if the issue comes up again. In fact,
    if I find time I may set up the situation again so that I can run a
    trace.


    >DMZ's are best avoided.

    I disabled the DMZ, it was just a temporay setup in order to do a legal
    torrent download. (I ran a web server farm for 12 years...) so, sometimes
    for somethings, and in some situations it really can't be avoided.
    But you right, DMZ is often full of bad news.

    I am still really curious as to how an IP that is unassinged responds to
    ping. That is the question here. Also why does my router logs show LAN
    traffic to and from this IP! My guess is that it has something to do
    with
    the NT domain and spooler trying to find the missing printer. Still a
    weird one overall... and I don't care much for guesses anyway. :)

    Hey thanks for the help, it's much a appreciated.


    Deb
     
    Deb, Aug 28, 2008
    #6
  7. Deb

    Deb Guest

    Ari <> wrote in
    news::

    > On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 04:10:28 GMT, Deb wrote:
    >
    >> I run an old school NT server w/ about half a dozen windows and
    >> linux boxes on my home LAN. All hard wired with static IP's.
    >>
    >> I was just going through my router logs (linksys befsr41 v3 w/
    >> updated firmware) and I noticed packets to and from IP
    >> 192.168.0.200. This IP is assigned to my network printer but
    >> that printer is currently disconnected. I pinged the IP and
    >> got replies!
    >>
    >> As an aside, I also notice that some times the zonealarm
    >> firewalls on my windoze machines will flag spooler sub system
    >> for trying to access the internet zone. This usually happens
    >> when I connect to a share on another machine. All my machines
    >> are in the trusted zone (private ip block 192.168.0.0 -
    >> 192.168.0.256) so I see no need for the spooler to look else
    >> where.
    >>
    >> To top it all off, I also noticed that my routers DMZ was set
    >> to the same IP (192.168.0.200) I recently set on of my boxes up
    >> in the DMZ for some temporary torrent downloads (legal linux
    >> distos) but the 192.168.0.200 ip was not the one I set up!
    >>
    >> I disabled DMZ and rebooted the router but was still able to
    >> ping the 192.168.0.200 address for over an hour before it
    >> finally stopped responding.
    >>
    >> I don't have a clue about why a device would respond to pings
    >> when it is not even connected to the LAN nor why my DMZ address
    >> would be automagically changed so I am assuming that somethings
    >> been hacked. I can't find anything on the boxes, no rootkits,
    >> spyware, virus's etc.
    >>
    >> I know zonealarms not the best but I don't have cash to buy
    >> anything better especially for NT server. Nevertheless, I
    >> haven't had a problem with this set up in over six years. Any
    >> ideas?
    >>
    >> Thanks in advance,
    >>
    >> Deb

    >
    > Are you MAC filtering?



    No MAC filtering here, I change hardware fairly often and it just adds
    one
    more thing to keep track of. BTW, 6-10 machines is a bit overkill for 2
    users. So, I strive to keep a balance between security and convienence.


    >192.168.x.x


    >is not going anywhere over the Internet because its a non
    >routable block. You should have run tracert which may
    >have been interesting.


    Of course, 192.168.x.x is not routable thats why we use it for internal,
    right? :) I will run a trace route if the issue comes up again. In fact,
    if I find time I may set up the situation again so that I can run a
    trace.


    >DMZ's are best avoided.

    I disabled the DMZ, it was just a temporay setup in order to do a legal
    torrent download. (I ran a web server farm for 12 years...) so, sometimes
    for somethings, and in some situations it really can't be avoided.
    But you right, DMZ is often full of bad news.

    I am still really curious as to how an IP that is unassinged responds to
    ping. That is the question here. Also why does my router logs show LAN
    traffic to and from this IP! My guess is that it has something to do
    with
    the NT domain and spooler trying to find the missing printer. Still a
    weird one overall... and I don't care much for guesses anyway. :)

    Hey thanks for the help, it's much a appreciated.


    Deb
     
    Deb, Aug 28, 2008
    #7
  8. Deb

    Ari Guest

    On Thu, 28 Aug 2008 18:08:18 GMT, Deb wrote:

    > I am still really curious as to how an IP that is unassinged responds to
    > ping. That is the question here. Also why does my router logs show LAN
    > traffic to and from this IP! My guess is that it has something to do
    > with
    > the NT domain and spooler trying to find the missing printer. Still a
    > weird one overall... and I don't care much for guesses anyway. :)


    What are the chances that this offline printer IP was hacked and there
    was a real computer on the other side?
     
    Ari, Aug 29, 2008
    #8
  9. Deb

    Ari Guest

    On Thu, 28 Aug 2008 18:08:18 GMT, Deb wrote:

    > I am still really curious as to how an IP that is unassinged responds to
    > ping. That is the question here. Also why does my router logs show LAN
    > traffic to and from this IP! My guess is that it has something to do
    > with
    > the NT domain and spooler trying to find the missing printer. Still a
    > weird one overall... and I don't care much for guesses anyway. :)


    What are the chances that this offline printer IP was hacked and there
    was a real computer on the other side?
     
    Ari, Aug 29, 2008
    #9
  10. Deb

    Jim Watt Guest

    On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 03:05:39 GMT, Deb <> wrote:

    >It is all so obvious that unconnected devices are not pingable nor do
    >they show up in router logs (both incoming/outgoing.) I'm just trying to
    >understand how this occured...


    if you can recreate the situation again, do so and then
    start removing devices physically until you find out which
    one is using that address, and then investigate why.
    --
    Jim Watt
    http://www.gibnet.com
     
    Jim Watt, Aug 29, 2008
    #10
  11. Deb

    Jim Watt Guest

    On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 03:05:39 GMT, Deb <> wrote:

    >It is all so obvious that unconnected devices are not pingable nor do
    >they show up in router logs (both incoming/outgoing.) I'm just trying to
    >understand how this occured...


    if you can recreate the situation again, do so and then
    start removing devices physically until you find out which
    one is using that address, and then investigate why.
    --
    Jim Watt
    http://www.gibnet.com
     
    Jim Watt, Aug 29, 2008
    #11
  12. Deb

    Ari Guest

    On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 09:51:15 +0200, Jim Watt wrote:

    > On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 03:05:39 GMT, Deb <> wrote:
    >
    >>It is all so obvious that unconnected devices are not pingable nor do
    >>they show up in router logs (both incoming/outgoing.) I'm just trying to
    >>understand how this occured...

    >
    > if you can recreate the situation again, do so and then
    > start removing devices physically until you find out which
    > one is using that address, and then investigate why.


    Jim, this is a good approach but doesn't address the use of a "vacant"
    IP. What happens if she pulls off the devices to find she still has a
    "phantom" returning pings from a dead IP address?
     
    Ari, Aug 29, 2008
    #12
  13. Deb

    Ari Guest

    On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 09:51:15 +0200, Jim Watt wrote:

    > On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 03:05:39 GMT, Deb <> wrote:
    >
    >>It is all so obvious that unconnected devices are not pingable nor do
    >>they show up in router logs (both incoming/outgoing.) I'm just trying to
    >>understand how this occured...

    >
    > if you can recreate the situation again, do so and then
    > start removing devices physically until you find out which
    > one is using that address, and then investigate why.


    Jim, this is a good approach but doesn't address the use of a "vacant"
    IP. What happens if she pulls off the devices to find she still has a
    "phantom" returning pings from a dead IP address?
     
    Ari, Aug 29, 2008
    #13
  14. Deb

    Deb Guest

    Ari <> wrote in
    news::

    > On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 09:51:15 +0200, Jim Watt wrote:
    >
    >> On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 03:05:39 GMT, Deb <> wrote:
    >>
    >>>It is all so obvious that unconnected devices are not pingable nor do
    >>>they show up in router logs (both incoming/outgoing.) I'm just trying
    >>>to understand how this occured...

    >>
    >> if you can recreate the situation again, do so and then
    >> start removing devices physically until you find out which
    >> one is using that address, and then investigate why.

    >
    > Jim, this is a good approach but doesn't address the use of a "vacant"
    > IP. What happens if she pulls off the devices to find she still has a
    > "phantom" returning pings from a dead IP address?
    >


    Hey guys thanks for hanging in there with me on this. its much
    appreciated.

    I sort of already tried the device by device approach, I set the
    individual firewalls on each machine to block all traffic. It appeared to
    be the router that was was responding. That's when I checked the routers
    settings and found the DMZ set to the "phantom" addresss i.e
    102.168.0.200. As mentioned in my orginal post, I had set the DMZ to a
    different IP. How it got changed is my real concern here... The other
    odd thing is that after I disabled the DMZ and rebooted the router; The
    ping responds continued for about another hour.

    Thanks again everyone,

    Deb
     
    Deb, Aug 30, 2008
    #14
  15. Deb

    Deb Guest

    Ari <> wrote in
    news::

    > On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 09:51:15 +0200, Jim Watt wrote:
    >
    >> On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 03:05:39 GMT, Deb <> wrote:
    >>
    >>>It is all so obvious that unconnected devices are not pingable nor do
    >>>they show up in router logs (both incoming/outgoing.) I'm just trying
    >>>to understand how this occured...

    >>
    >> if you can recreate the situation again, do so and then
    >> start removing devices physically until you find out which
    >> one is using that address, and then investigate why.

    >
    > Jim, this is a good approach but doesn't address the use of a "vacant"
    > IP. What happens if she pulls off the devices to find she still has a
    > "phantom" returning pings from a dead IP address?
    >


    Hey guys thanks for hanging in there with me on this. its much
    appreciated.

    I sort of already tried the device by device approach, I set the
    individual firewalls on each machine to block all traffic. It appeared to
    be the router that was was responding. That's when I checked the routers
    settings and found the DMZ set to the "phantom" addresss i.e
    102.168.0.200. As mentioned in my orginal post, I had set the DMZ to a
    different IP. How it got changed is my real concern here... The other
    odd thing is that after I disabled the DMZ and rebooted the router; The
    ping responds continued for about another hour.

    Thanks again everyone,

    Deb
     
    Deb, Aug 30, 2008
    #15
  16. Deb

    Jim Watt Guest

    On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 23:52:17 GMT, Deb <> wrote:

    >Ari <> wrote in
    >news::
    >
    >> On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 09:51:15 +0200, Jim Watt wrote:
    >>
    >>> On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 03:05:39 GMT, Deb <> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>It is all so obvious that unconnected devices are not pingable nor do
    >>>>they show up in router logs (both incoming/outgoing.) I'm just trying
    >>>>to understand how this occured...
    >>>
    >>> if you can recreate the situation again, do so and then
    >>> start removing devices physically until you find out which
    >>> one is using that address, and then investigate why.

    >>
    >> Jim, this is a good approach but doesn't address the use of a "vacant"
    >> IP. What happens if she pulls off the devices to find she still has a
    >> "phantom" returning pings from a dead IP address?
    >>

    >
    >Hey guys thanks for hanging in there with me on this. its much
    >appreciated.
    >
    >I sort of already tried the device by device approach, I set the
    >individual firewalls on each machine to block all traffic. It appeared to
    >be the router that was was responding. That's when I checked the routers
    >settings and found the DMZ set to the "phantom" addresss i.e
    >102.168.0.200. As mentioned in my orginal post, I had set the DMZ to a
    >different IP. How it got changed is my real concern here... The other
    >odd thing is that after I disabled the DMZ and rebooted the router; The
    >ping responds continued for about another hour.
    >
    >Thanks again everyone,
    >
    >Deb


    It sounds like 'a feature' rather than something
    malevolent.

    Most routers allow you to opt in and out of configuring
    them from the WAN side, make sure its off.
    --
    Jim Watt
    http://www.gibnet.com
     
    Jim Watt, Aug 30, 2008
    #16
  17. Deb

    Jim Watt Guest

    On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 23:52:17 GMT, Deb <> wrote:

    >Ari <> wrote in
    >news::
    >
    >> On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 09:51:15 +0200, Jim Watt wrote:
    >>
    >>> On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 03:05:39 GMT, Deb <> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>It is all so obvious that unconnected devices are not pingable nor do
    >>>>they show up in router logs (both incoming/outgoing.) I'm just trying
    >>>>to understand how this occured...
    >>>
    >>> if you can recreate the situation again, do so and then
    >>> start removing devices physically until you find out which
    >>> one is using that address, and then investigate why.

    >>
    >> Jim, this is a good approach but doesn't address the use of a "vacant"
    >> IP. What happens if she pulls off the devices to find she still has a
    >> "phantom" returning pings from a dead IP address?
    >>

    >
    >Hey guys thanks for hanging in there with me on this. its much
    >appreciated.
    >
    >I sort of already tried the device by device approach, I set the
    >individual firewalls on each machine to block all traffic. It appeared to
    >be the router that was was responding. That's when I checked the routers
    >settings and found the DMZ set to the "phantom" addresss i.e
    >102.168.0.200. As mentioned in my orginal post, I had set the DMZ to a
    >different IP. How it got changed is my real concern here... The other
    >odd thing is that after I disabled the DMZ and rebooted the router; The
    >ping responds continued for about another hour.
    >
    >Thanks again everyone,
    >
    >Deb


    It sounds like 'a feature' rather than something
    malevolent.

    Most routers allow you to opt in and out of configuring
    them from the WAN side, make sure its off.
    --
    Jim Watt
    http://www.gibnet.com
     
    Jim Watt, Aug 30, 2008
    #17
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Slambram
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    752
  2. Ste

    Help with IP Pingable

    Ste, Aug 15, 2004, in forum: Cisco
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    536
  3. Matt P.
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    865
  4. PVR

    Unused icons in My Network Places.

    PVR, Mar 27, 2009, in forum: Wireless Networking
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    1,159
    Jack [MVP-Networking]
    Mar 27, 2009
  5. Personne
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    461
    Personne
    Apr 29, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page