| Author |
Message |
Stray_Bullet New Member


Joined: Nov 13, 2004 Posts: 17 Location: New York, USA
|
Posted:
Sat Jul 18, 2009 3:55 pm |
|
Okay quick question... I use RN 2.30.02 with sentinel 2.6.02. I recieved an email from a user wanting to check out my site but he emailed me saying his ip range was banned.
Here is the email... The ip is hidden for privacy purposes.
Hi there. I was going to check out your site(I saw it in your sig), but
for some reason, my IP range has been blocked?
Here's the info for you:
*User Agent:* Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US;
rv:1.9.0.11) Gecko/2009060215 Firefox/3.0.11
*Remote Address:* 173.*.*.*
*Client IP:* none
*Forwarded For:* none
Now I checked the banned ip ranges in sentinel. It says 173.0.0.0 to 173.255.255.255 is banned for IANA reserved.
Is this a mistake? I checked the ip & it is located in the united states & appears to be vaild.
Thanks in advance!
 |
|
|
|
 |
Raven Site Admin/Owner

Joined: Aug 27, 2002 Posts: 16976 Location: Kansas
|
Posted:
Sat Jul 18, 2009 6:08 pm |
|
Have you updated your IP2Country tables with the most recent updates?
|
|
|
|
 |
Stray_Bullet New Member


Joined: Nov 13, 2004 Posts: 17 Location: New York, USA
|
Posted:
Sun Jul 19, 2009 10:21 am |
|
Why thank you sir! That fixed it!  |
|
|
|
 |
blith Client

Joined: Jul 18, 2003 Posts: 977
|
Posted:
Mon Jul 27, 2009 9:14 am |
|
| Raven wrote: | Have you updated your IP2Country tables with the most recent updates?
|
Is it correct in saying that anyone who has been blocked from the site in this manner should be able to see it now? Or do they have to clear cookies and such? Thanks!
*edit* The Range 173. is still not in excluded or protected after running the upgrade.... *end edit* |
|
|
|
 |
Raven Site Admin/Owner

Joined: Aug 27, 2002 Posts: 16976 Location: Kansas
|
Posted:
Mon Jul 27, 2009 10:06 am |
|
| blith wrote: | | Raven wrote: | Have you updated your IP2Country tables with the most recent updates?
|
Is it correct in saying that anyone who has been blocked from the site in this manner should be able to see it now? Or do they have to clear cookies and such? Thanks!
*edit* The Range 173. is still not in excluded or protected after running the upgrade.... *end edit* |
Only up to the point that the IP database was up to date when I released it. I released it 7/16/2009 if I remember correctly. But the data may have been June month end.
You can hand add any ranges that you find. |
|
|
|
 |
Palbin Site Admin

Joined: Mar 30, 2006 Posts: 2404 Location: Pennsylvania
|
Posted:
Mon Jul 27, 2009 1:39 pm |
|
If you want you can bypass the invalid ip check from within rnconfig.php. |
|
|
|
 |
blith Client

Joined: Jul 18, 2003 Posts: 977
|
Posted:
Mon Aug 03, 2009 9:46 am |
|
| Palbin wrote: | | If you want you can bypass the invalid ip check from within rnconfig.php. |
Yes, I have read that. What is the point of having it if everyone needs to bypass it? Not facetious, just curious. |
|
|
|
 |
Raven Site Admin/Owner

Joined: Aug 27, 2002 Posts: 16976 Location: Kansas
|
Posted:
Mon Aug 03, 2009 9:55 am |
|
They don't. I don't need to on my Production sites, for example. But for local PC testing it is needed. IP 127.0.0.1 and certain other IP's are IANA reserved and you will be blocked, locally, without it. If your IP2C tables are up to date you shouldn't need it on a Production site, normally. But it is there, as a tool, should you need it. |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|