On Mon, Oct 25, 2021, 4:24 PM Punk-BatSoup-Stasi 2.0 <punks@tfwno.gf> wrote:
On Mon, 25 Oct 2021 15:45:59 -0400 Karl Semich <0xloem@gmail.com> wrote:
furthermore
telnet stimson.state.gov 25 telnet: can't connect to remote host (169.252.4.132): No route
to
host
telnet stimson.state.gov 80 connects
so, at face value, nothing is listening on port 25
0.o is that a real log?
The error message pertains to the host, not the port.
that's what busybox's telnet says. Python says
socket.error: [Errno 113] No route to host
so it looks like the idiotic message "no route to host" means : can't connect to x.x.x.x:port -- so the error message pertains to the host:port combination and it's badly worded.
usually "no route to host" is from the x.x.x.x but is unrelated to the port. it's possible it could appear related to the port due to random timing or something could be intentionally triggering the not-usually-port-related error only attempts to connect to the port were made maybe routing has changed in the past ten years?
I'm having experiences like that, too.