On Mon, 19 Mar 2001, Charles M. Hannum wrote:

> I think you need to supply more info -- like the output of `netstat -in'
> and `netstat -rn'.

I realized this half way through deleting routes from my box, but
preserved the following from 'route -n show':

204.71.200.75      216.36.121.116     UGHD        0        0   1500  tl0
204.178.110.67     216.36.121.116     UGHD        0       11   1500  tl0
208.5.85.132       216.36.121.116     UGHD        0       10   1500  tl0
216.32.65.105      216.36.121.116     UGHD        0       11   1500  tl0
216.36.121.112/29  link#1             UC          0        0   1500  tl0
216.36.121.113     00:00:c5:79:de:64  UHL         1      342   1500  tl0
216.36.121.114     00:80:5f:57:00:1f  UHL         0    19709   1500  lo0
216.36.121.116     02:60:8c:ae:66:3a  UHL         8    50295   1500  tl0

It's those 204.* and 208.* and 216.32.65.105 that worry me.  There was
also a 63.x.x.x route which was there (sorry, deleted it before I
realized...).

This has been happening for at least two months; it's only been recently
that I've slapped my head and realized that 1) none of these boxes ever
have run routed, 2) none of these boxes have been accessed except by me
(afaik... ;-) and 3) these routes are pointing abnormally to my .116 host,
which doesn't do squat but NAT for a 192.168.x set of networks.

Hmmmm... I sure hope I'm doing something wrong here.

-Jon