Seacom blocking UnoTelly?

C

CPTBoy

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2011
Messages
1,405
Reaction score
431
I've had a problem with my service provider ( WISP backed by Seacom upstream ) for the last couple of days where UnoTelly just suddenly stopped working.

The WISP explicitly allows the I.P. addresses to go out, but it seems that Seacom is blocking them. My WISP tells me that Seacom tells them after the DNS issues of last week with Google and that Netflix is now global they are blocking UnoTelly.

Service providers using Telkom / IS still allows this.

Is there any truth behind this or are they spinning me a tale?
 
Last edited:
I think they are spinning you a tale. Can you try using Google DNS or an alternate DNS provider and see if it works.

Could be the wisp blocking DNS queries outside their own network
 
I have no info but I am bumping out of interest. Although, to me it seems INCREDIBLY unlikely that Seacom will block anything, and Unotelly is just a DNS server. I don't think anything gets blocked after the ISP level, unless you live in China or North Korea or the like.
 
CPTBoy said:
I've had a problem with my service provider ( WISP backed by Seacom upstream ) for the last couple of days where UnoTelly just suddenly stopped working.

The WISP explicitly allows the I.P. addresses to go out, but it seems that Seacom is blocking them. My WISP tells me that Seacom tells them after the DNS issues of last week with Google and that Netflix is now global they are blocking UnoTelly.

Service providers using Telkom / IS still allows this.

Is there any truth behind this or are they spinnig me a tale?
Click to expand...

If it was Seacom we'd see this whole forum EXPLODE with complaints.

So far I've only seen you complain.
 
imranpanji said:
I think they are spinning you a tale. Can you try using Google DNS or an alternate DNS provider and see if it works.

Could be the wisp blocking DNS queries outside their own network
Click to expand...

Yup, when using 8.8.8.8 for example everything is dandy, but the moment I try 197.242.94.51 all sites fail.
 
CPTBoy said:
Yup, when using 8.8.8.8 for example everything is dandy, but the moment I try 197.242.94.51 all sites fail.
Click to expand...

Have you tried other Unotelly IPs like Ireland for example?
 
And you have authorised your current IP on the Unotelly site? ie: When you go to the unotelly site it says your setup is all good?
 
roligov said:
And you have authorised your current IP on the Unotelly site? ie: When you go to the unotelly site it says your setup is all good?
Click to expand...

It was working for months. I can't authorise anymore with their IP because I can't even access the Unotelly site.
 
Chevron said:
If it was Seacom we'd see this whole forum EXPLODE with complaints.

So far I've only seen you complain.
Click to expand...

I don't think Seacom are an ISP so I don't think they can block anything. I think they just provide a cable link.

Might be the local ISP's international provider
 
I would ask proof from your WISP that Seacom said that and then light a fire under whoever is responsible. No ISP should be internet police.
 
roligov said:
Mmmm....Tracert 108.61.44.139 ?
Click to expand...

traceroute 108.61.44.139
traceroute to 108.61.44.139 (108.61.44.139), 64 hops max, 52 byte packets
1 rt-n56u (192.168.10.1) 1.270 ms 0.838 ms 0.638 ms
2 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1) 1.128 ms 1.046 ms 0.899 ms
3 172.16.100.204 (172.16.100.204) 3.318 ms 3.308 ms 1.710 ms
4 172.16.100.201 (172.16.100.201) 8.513 ms 6.092 ms 7.964 ms
5 172.16.1.97 (172.16.1.97) 13.031 ms 46.371 ms 9.199 ms
6 41.78.164.226 (41.78.164.226) 30.705 ms 27.796 ms 13.581 ms
7 105.22.64.17 (105.22.64.17) 16.097 ms 7.996 ms 8.561 ms
8 105.16.31.1 (105.16.31.1) 176.888 ms 150.575 ms 187.436 ms
9 105.16.8.234 (105.16.8.234) 154.916 ms * 283.839 ms
10 105.16.35.253 (105.16.35.253) 296.756 ms 168.828 ms 219.690 ms
11 213.130.48.217 (213.130.48.217) 230.588 ms 156.514 ms 165.186 ms
12 129.250.4.20 (129.250.4.20) 195.209 ms
129.250.6.54 (129.250.6.54) 309.912 ms
129.250.4.20 (129.250.4.20) 168.536 ms
13 129.250.4.85 (129.250.4.85) 156.480 ms 219.940 ms
129.250.2.18 (129.250.2.18) 240.609 ms
14 129.250.2.18 (129.250.2.18) 220.302 ms * 217.522 ms
15 * 129.250.5.205 (129.250.5.205) 222.770 ms
128.241.2.202 (128.241.2.202) 259.674 ms
16 128.241.2.250 (128.241.2.250) 318.103 ms * 237.679 ms
17 * *^C
 
More than likely they are natting a few clients behind one public IP, probably reported for excessive abuse and blocked.
 
CPTBoy said:
traceroute 108.61.44.139
traceroute to 108.61.44.139 (108.61.44.139), 64 hops max, 52 byte packets
1 rt-n56u (192.168.10.1) 1.270 ms 0.838 ms 0.638 ms
2 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1) 1.128 ms 1.046 ms 0.899 ms
3 172.16.100.204 (172.16.100.204) 3.318 ms 3.308 ms 1.710 ms
4 172.16.100.201 (172.16.100.201) 8.513 ms 6.092 ms 7.964 ms
5 172.16.1.97 (172.16.1.97) 13.031 ms 46.371 ms 9.199 ms
6 41.78.164.226 (41.78.164.226) 30.705 ms 27.796 ms 13.581 ms
Click to expand...

Those are all private addresses. Only comes out at hop 6
 
Last edited:
paul5186 said:
More than likely they are natting a few clients behind one public IP, probably reported for excessive abuse and blocked.
Click to expand...

You sir are a legend!

I suggested it to the WISP and they changed me to another IP range and it's working again.

Thank you very much!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X