On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 12:56 PM, Denis Spirin wrote:
(snip)
> So, noone is protected from IP network stealing. And noone cares. If
> Internap or it's uplinks was more clever and more insistent - we really had
> a chance to lost our networks forever.
Denis, I think you handled it pretty well from
Hello All,
let me tell you the final of the story with the hijacking of our networks.
So, in the end of July, we found some of our networks are announced
somewhere without our permission. That was the illegal announce from
Internap. We sent the letter to Internap on August, 11th. Internap replied
Hi All,
I looked up here http://www.robtex.com/as/as31733.html#graph internap on
24th of August and found Internap announced our networks to Telia, Cogent,
NTT, Glbx and Tinet.
I wrote to all of them.
First reply was from Tinet. They even had a time and wish to call me by the
phone. They said sto
Hello Adrian,
I tried to reply to list from office without the TOR you don't like, and got
this:
: host mailman.nanog.org[204.93.212.138] said: 550-rejected
because 86.59.128.2 is in a black list at zen.spamhaus.org 550
http://www.spamhaus.org/SBL/sbl.lasso?query=SBL116130 (in reply to RC
> John Curran appears to be completely open to constructive suggestions
very well phrased
unfortunately it is a long way to results, with very high variance
randy
Jimmy,
On Aug 21, 2011, at 8:15 AM, Jimmy Hess wrote:
> The system is this way BY DESIGN, and any other method would concentrate
> power
> which would be detrimental to the internet and counter to its
> open/consensus driven nature.
See recent discussions in RIPEland regarding BGPSEC+RPKI reg
On Sun, 21 Aug 2011, Ken Chase wrote:
That said, what is the de jure responce when a prefix is hijacked? Does
anyone have a 'best practices' guide? I am sure some of the most effective
vs legal practices are not in fact concomittant.
It doesn't hurt to complain/announce about it here and vario
On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 05:26:46PM +, Nathan Eisenberg said:
>John Curran appears to be completely open to constructive suggestions, so
if you have real and substantive input, why not contribute your intellect to
the problem and talk to him? Every organization has things they could be
> On Aug 20, 2011, at 10:29 PM, Tammy A. Wisdom wrote:
>> 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 abs
> RIPE/ARIN/APNIC etc have zero actual authority over actual routing.
That is not a flaw in the system, it is a fundamental precept of it. Their
function (In Curran's words: "as the community has defined it") is as a
registry of allocation data, not as some kind of authoritative regional route
On Aug 20, 2011, at 10:29 PM, Tammy A. Wisdom wrote:
> 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 absolut
On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 3:27 AM, Erik Bais wrote:
> Convenient as it may be to use a LIR and their historic provided prefixes,
> have you thought about starting with a clean slate ?
It's probably better for the network community if he _doesn't_ let an apparently
known hijack to continue; maybe
On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 6:44 AM, Denis Spirin wrote:
> Where do you see the permission of Internap to transit our AS31733?
>
> aut-num: AS31733
> as-name: LINKTEL-AS
> descr: Link Telecom PJSC
> org: ORG-LTP1-RIPE
> import: from AS8342 accept ANY
> im
What I understand is that he is clamming that the registration of this
prefix was hijacked from him.
But honestly I do not what the problem is. Any how, it won't be solved
here.
Regards,
/as
On 21 Aug 2011, at 02:25, David Conrad wrote:
> On Aug 20, 2011, at 6:01 PM
Hi Denis,
That is exactly why you might want to send an abuse msg to Tinet and NTT as
they as accepting the prefixes fromm Portnap.
Erik
Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPad
Op Aug 21, 2011 om 12:44 heeft Denis Spirin het
volgende geschreven:
> Where do you see the permission of Internap to transit ou
Where do you see the permission of Internap to transit our AS31733?
aut-num: AS31733
as-name: LINKTEL-AS
descr: Link Telecom PJSC
org: ORG-LTP1-RIPE
import: from AS8342 accept ANY
import: from AS12695 accept ANY
import: from AS44109
Of course, we have less customers than we have a year ago. Not a zero in any
case. Some parts of network was rented to other ISPs and will be returned.
Some was NATed after upstream shut down the BGP. How much IP we need now we
will discuss with RIPE NCC, if they will. First, we should have to shut
Hi Erik,
The RIPE DB shows clear Internap have NO permission to route our networks as
the direct uplink. Am I wrong?
2011/8/21 Erik Bais
> Hi Denis,
>
> If Portnap doesn't / won't assist in this matter, you can send an abuse
> message to both Tinet and NTT and have them reject the prefixes on t
Hi Denis,
If Portnap doesn't / won't assist in this matter, you can send an abuse
message to both Tinet and NTT and have them reject the prefixes on their
ingress port.
They will probably only do that in case you have your AS record and route
objects correctly documented and can actually provid
Hi Denis,
Convenient as it may be to use a LIR and their historic provided prefixes,
have you thought about starting with a clean slate ?
If the company was close to bankrupt and one can only assume that it didn't
require a couple /16's and a couple /19's ...
Didn't you get ANY questions from R
gt; From: "David Conrad"
> To: "Arturo Servin"
> Cc: nanog@nanog.org
> Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2011 11:25:51 PM
> Subject: Re: Prefix hijacking by Michael Lindsay via Internap
>
> On Aug 20, 2011, at 6:01 PM, Arturo Servin wrote:
> > If you are
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
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
>
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
38 matches
Mail list logo
