mailing list archives
Re: Hijacked Network Ranges
From: Mark Tinka <mtinka () globaltransit net>
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2012 12:49:49 +0800
On Wednesday, February 01, 2012 12:10:32 PM George Bonser
Customer relationship with Kelvin's firm terminated and
they contracted for service elsewhere but are apparently
attempting to maintain the use of the address
allocation(s) they received from Kelvin's firm. They
apparently did this by misrepresenting the fact that
they were entitled to use that address space.
We've been in such situations without customers requesting
us either to:
a) Block certain addresses across their transit
links in order to mitigate DoS attacks.
b) Announce address space which does not necessarily
belong to them, even though they aren't being
In either case, a quick check of the RIR WHOIS database to
qualify consistency in information does not hurt. Yes, WHOIS
records aren't always the most up-to-date, but it's a fairly
good representation of the truth most of the time,
especially since 'inetnum' objects tend to be managed by the
RIR's themselves, last time I checked.
This is quickly making the case for RPKI.
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Hijacked Network Ranges Mark Tinka (Feb 06)
Re: Hijacked Network Ranges Scott Weeks (Feb 06)