Aha! That makes sense!
I was struggling to find any kind of public data on who runs it, so I
assumed whoever was presenting it probably runs / owned it
On Tue, Feb 27, 2024, 08:20 Fearghas Mckay wrote:
>
>
> On 27 Feb 2024, at 01:28, Ben Cox via NANOG wrote:
>
> I believe Packe
I believe PacketVis is Massimo Candela , based on
https://ripe85.ripe.net/archives/video/987/
On Mon, 26 Feb 2024 at 18:24, Denis Fondras via NANOG wrote:
>
> Le Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 07:12:57PM +0100, Job Snijders via NANOG a écrit :
> > On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 05:41:12PM +, Ray Orsini via NA
[Full Disclosure, the bgp.tools guy will of course tell you to use bgp.tools]
Unsure what the etiquette for self promotion is on this mailing list,
but I would happily recommend bgp.tools (the service I run). It
supports the development of the BGP toolkit at the same time.
For myself (since I can
I spoke with someone at Mimecast and we concluded the the customer of
mimecast has setup that rule (likely the whole of *.tools), since they
could not find anything on there end that didnt like bgp.tools
On Wed, Jan 17, 2024 at 10:54 PM Christopher Hawker
wrote:
>
> It'd be interesting to know
Fixed, cheers for pointing that logical error out :)
$ git show
commit 689bca929c5d3a27e6aa4f12195bf3b81b3be719 (HEAD -> master)
Author: Ben Cartwright-Cox
Date: Tue Jan 16 23:17:08 2024 +
clarify pricing for a nanog person
https://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2024-January/22
Ah, apologies on my part Tony, it did look at lot like a signature block
and thus a amusing sock puppet SNAFU
On Mon, Jan 8, 2024, 20:54 Tony Wicks wrote:
> No, Eddies is NOT me, I included his details to be helpful to the OP….
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Ben Cox
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 9, 2024 9:
Hey Tony/Eddie
I think your choice of email signature may have given away the game a
little bit here
Regards
Ben Cartwright-Cox
On Mon, Jan 8, 2024, 20:00 Tony Wicks wrote:
> I have used Eddie at iptrading several times over the yearsfor IP block
> purchases and never had this sort of issue, s
Hey everybody, I run bgp.tools, (And had a extremely busy alerting
engine for a few minutes)
>From what bgp.tools can see it seems like they had a private asn in
the path like so
```
2027 422027 6696 6939 42615 212232
```
This can be valid for a number of reasons, ( they might have been
doi
Can you confirm what you mean by compromised here?
The prefixes currently (as far as I can see from bgp.tools) originated are:
Prefix Description
209.255.244.0/24 Windstream Communications LLC
209.255.245.0/24 CONSOLIDATED TECHNOLOGIES INC 325 HUDSON
209.255.246.0/24 Windstream
Search "speed test" and Google search had one built in
On Wed, 28 Dec 2022, 16:43 Mike Hammett, wrote:
> Does AS15169 have a speed test? It would be nice to gauge the capacity to
> a particular network that's something laypeople could do. I could host
> something in GCP myself, but cloud is expe
I run bgp.tools (with it's own route collectors, that people should
totally feed :) https://bgp.tools/kb/setup-sessions ) but I feel like
I can add some insight here to what I think is happening with
AS147028.
I've had multiple issues with networks feeding me that also are on
LL-IX (https://www.pe
Just in case - how are you checking they are announced?
Is there a chance they are stuck routes as documented (self blog post) here
( https://blog.benjojo.co.uk/post/bgp-stuck-routes-tcp-zero-window ) ?
On Fri, 16 Jul 2021, 01:20 Dave Browning, wrote:
> Anyone on the list from Zayo NOC who can
12 matches
Mail list logo
