I completely agree... the real issue here is the system is flawed and
RIPE/ARIN/APNIC etc have zero actual authority over actual routing. Yet
another reason they aren't worth the money we flush down the toilet for them to
do absolutely nothing.
--Tammy
- Original Message -
> From: "D
On Aug 20, 2011, at 6:01 PM, Arturo Servin wrote:
> If you are claiming right over these prefixes I suggest you to contact
> RIPE NCC.
And that will do what exactly?
Back when I worked at an RIR, a prefix was "misplaced". When I contacted the
(country monopoly PTT) ISP and told them the
>> o Trust model (how much trust is put in whom so that connectivity works)
>> o How much state where
>> o Security implications (where are the weak links, vectors for attack)
>> o Traffic engineering (ingress and egress) features
>> o Session survivability on rerouting (manual and due to outages)
On 21 Aug 2011, at 00:28, Denis Spirin wrote:
> Yes, they are using our ASN 31733 to originate networks. All the visible
> paths are through AS12182. Internap was contacted about a week ago, but did
> nothing.
Which seems to be the right decision because the whois data backed it
on.
>
I did ask him to try it and see if it works .. when it doesn't work,
that'd be the next act in this little dog and pony show.
On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 9:11 AM, William Herrin wrote:
>
> The Spamhaus reports appear credible, as does the RIPE registration
> issue with those prefixes. If I was InterN
On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 11:18 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian
wrote:
> You could ask that they withdraw the prefixes and see if that works?
whois 46.96.0.0
inetnum:46.96.0.0 - 46.96.39.255
netname:LINKTEL-MAN-ETHERNET-EXTENSION
Updated:2011-03-15 *
e-mail:
Get that changed first eh? It just might prove that you own those prefixes.
On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 9:02 AM, Denis Spirin wrote:
> RIPE NCC can't withdraw any prefixes. They can do de-registration. In this
> case it will not lead to withdraw, as it is announced without any honor to
> RIPE Databa
RIPE NCC can't withdraw any prefixes. They can do de-registration. In this
case it will not lead to withdraw, as it is announced without any honor to
RIPE Database, like Routing Registry. So it will be changed from hijacked
company prefix to hijacked unused prefix, with the same result - mass
spamm
Yes, they are using our ASN 31733 to originate networks. All the visible
paths are through AS12182. Internap was contacted about a week ago, but did
nothing.
No, I'm not a venture capitalist, but IT specialist.
I am too sleepy, so replied to Adrian directly while wanted to post in the
list.
2011/
These prefix are originated by AS31733 which seems to be assigned to
the same organisation than the ASN, which in turn seems to be you.
I can see AS12182 in the path but not originating the route. So I do
not understand what are your claiming.
.as
On 20 Aug 2011, at 23:05, De
You could ask that they withdraw the prefixes and see if that works?
On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 8:45 AM, Denis Spirin wrote:
> RIPE NCC staff is already doing its investigation.
>
> And RIPE NCC can't stop the routing at all.
--
Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.li...@gmail.com)
RIPE NCC staff is already doing its investigation.
And RIPE NCC can't stop the routing at all.
2011/8/21 Suresh Ramasubramanian
> Just as interesting is that those prefixes are certainly on spamhaus.
>
> This should turn out very interesting indeed - maybe RIPE NCC should
> just reclaim those p
On Saturday 20 August 2011 19:49, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
> Just as interesting is that those prefixes are certainly on spamhaus.
>
> This should turn out very interesting indeed - maybe RIPE NCC should
> just reclaim those prefixes till their ownership is resolved. If
> ever.
>
> On Sun, Au
Just as interesting is that those prefixes are certainly on spamhaus.
This should turn out very interesting indeed - maybe RIPE NCC should
just reclaim those prefixes till their ownership is resolved. If
ever.
On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 7:43 AM, Adrian wrote:
>
> H, interesting..
>
--
On Saturday 20 August 2011 18:05, Denis Spirin wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> I was hired by the Russian ISP company to get it back to the business. Due
> to impact of the financial crisis, the company was almost bankrupt, but
> then found the investor and have a big wish to life again.
...
Received: fro
Your claim Denis Spirin really-stinks!
./randy
--- On Sat, 8/20/11, Arturo Servin wrote:
> From: Arturo Servin
> Subject: Re: Prefix hijacking by Michael Lindsay via Internap
> To: "Denis Spirin"
> Cc: nanog@nanog.org
> Date: Saturday, August 20, 2011, 6:39 PM
>
> What's the prefix you cl
Right now there are:
46.96.0.0/16
83.223.224.0/19
94.250.128.0/19
94.250.160.0/19
188.164.0.0/24
As I can see in the spam block lists like Spamhaus, all our networks was
affected:
83.223.224.0/20
86.59.128.0/17
79.174.128.0/18
94.250.128.0/17
188.164.0.0/16
46.96.0.0/16
2011/8/21 Arturo Servin
What's the prefix you claim is hijacked?
/as
On 20 Aug 2011, at 22:05, Denis Spirin wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> I was hired by the Russian ISP company to get it back to the business. Due
> to impact of the financial crisis, the company was almost bankrupt, but then
> found the investor and
Hello All,
I was hired by the Russian ISP company to get it back to the business. Due
to impact of the financial crisis, the company was almost bankrupt, but then
found the investor and have a big wish to life again.
When I tried to announce it's networks, upstreams rejected to accept it
because
On Aug 16, 2011, at 9:40 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Aug 2011 10:53:24 EDT, Christopher Morrow said:
>
>> anyway, they do these donkey things because they can :( people have no
>> real option (except not to play the game, ala war games).
>
> My brother recently tried to get
Here's some background on two approaches that allow for locating:
http://www.fecinc.com/images/dynImages/Outside%20Plant%20FTTH%20presentation
1.pdf (page 11)
Frank
-Original Message-
From: Pete Carah [mailto:p...@altadena.net]
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2011 2:09 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 2:37 PM, Daniel Roesen wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 01:57:36PM -0700, Randy Bush wrote:
>> as you can see, i am interested in
>> o loc/id separation
>> o rounting table scaling
>> o deployability on the internet
>> o current state of development
>>
>> what did i
On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 01:57:36PM -0700, Randy Bush wrote:
> as you can see, i am interested in
> o loc/id separation
> o rounting table scaling
> o deployability on the internet
> o current state of development
>
> what did i miss? what major attributes interest you?
o Trust model (how
i am told that the following session has been accepted for the nanog
agenda.
A Comparison of Approaches to Loc/ID, Routing Scaling, and the
Universe
Abstract:
This session looks at and contrasts:
LISP (Dino Farinacci)
ILNP (Saleem Bhatti)
RFC 6296 (Fred Baker)
On 08/20/2011 02:07 PM, Matt Addison wrote:
> On Aug 20, 2011, at 3:09, Pete Carah wrote:
>
> Note that he wanted to use fiber for lightning protection; the metal
> strip rather negates that...
>
>
> Only if you plug the metal strip into your equipment. We usually don't do
> that with locate wire
Why not use wireless for it all if the bandwidth is enough. 5.8ghz kit is
pretty cheap and fast.
--
Leigh Porter
On 20 Aug 2011, at 04:16, "Frank Bulk" wrote:
> You can order custom-made patch cables that are outdoor rated from any
> decent company that sells fiber patch cables for a living.
On Aug 20, 2011, at 3:09, Pete Carah wrote:
Note that he wanted to use fiber for lightning protection; the metal
strip rather negates that...
Only if you plug the metal strip into your equipment. We usually don't do
that with locate wires (they usually sit unterminated, or maybe grounded,
depe
On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 11:06 AM, Vasil Kolev wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> According to the deployment schedule, a lot of the TLDs support DNSSEC,
> but there's no online resource that shows which registrars support
> adding such records. Is there any such list?
>
Here is a list of .ORG registrars sorted
Hello:
yes I do know Godaddy supports DNSSEC and I do believe Ipower does as
well.
James Smith
SmithwaySecurity
On Sat, 20 Aug 2011 19:06:15 +0300, Vasil Kolev
wrote:
Hi all,
According to the deployment schedule, a lot of the TLDs support
DNSSEC,
but there's no online resource that s
Hi all,
According to the deployment schedule, a lot of the TLDs support DNSSEC,
but there's no online resource that shows which registrars support
adding such records. Is there any such list?
(also, is there a list of registrars who support ipv6 glue records?)
--
Regards,
Vasil Kolev
signatur
I second this observation about emailing here to get someone from Go
Daddy to email you personally. It's actually quite quicker than
ab...@godaddy.com
On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 9:43 PM, Alan Bryant
wrote:
> I would like to say that since I posted on NANOG, I have had three
> different individuals f
We (AS22578) are unable to reach anything in 2620:0101:8001::/48 from
2620:4b::/48 (ICMP, 80/tcp, 443/tcp etc) and previous attempts to contact
Mozilla via more normal channels about this have not resulted in a resolution.
ryan@ashburn-netops:~$ mtr --report www.mozilla.com
HOST: ashburn-netops
On 08/19/2011 11:14 PM, Frank Bulk wrote:
> You can order custom-made patch cables that are outdoor rated from any
> decent company that sells fiber patch cables for a living. If you want it
> to be locatable, make sure it includes some kind of metal strip.
Note that he wanted to use fiber for lig
34 matches
Mail list logo
