On Mon, Oct 25, 2021, 4:24 PM Punk-BatSoup-Stasi 2.0
   <[1]punks@tfwno.gf> wrote:

     On Mon, 25 Oct 2021 15:45:59 -0400
     Karl Semich <[2]0xloem@gmail.com> wrote:
     > >
     > >         furthermore
     > >
     > >         telnet [3]stimson.state.gov 25
     > >         telnet: can't connect to remote host (169.252.4.132): No
     route to
     > > host
     > >
     > >         telnet [4]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.
     >
     > >

References

   1. mailto:punks@tfwno.gf
   2. mailto:0xloem@gmail.com
   3. http://stimson.state.gov/
   4. http://stimson.state.gov/