nanog mailing list archives

Re: 1.1.1.1

From: Noah van der Aa via NANOG <nanog () lists nanog org>
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2025 21:55:23 +0200

On 15/07/2025 21:18, Marco Moock via NANOG wrote:

Didn't RPKI and IR avoid any damage?


Yes - these route leaks didn't actually propagate very far.

The only reason they even appeared is because the actual route announcedby CF disappeared.All 1.1.1.1 related prefixes (v6 included) were withdrawn around thesame time. RIPE's BGPlay tool [0] shows the massive withdrawal spikequite nicely.


[0] https://stat.ripe.net/bgplay

_______________________________________________

NANOG mailing listhttps://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog () lists nanog org/message/FP2NP3F4A422JXTPBMVOUSNR6FYVYPUH/

Current thread:

1.1.1.1 Randy Bush via NANOG (Jul 15)
- Re: 1.1.1.1 Marco Moock via NANOG (Jul 15)
  - Re: 1.1.1.1 Francis Booth via NANOG (Jul 15)
    - RE: 1.1.1.1 Gary Sparkes via NANOG (Jul 15)
  - Re: 1.1.1.1 Noah van der Aa via NANOG (Jul 15)
    - Re: 1.1.1.1 Tom Beecher via NANOG (Jul 16)
    - Re: 1.1.1.1 Saku Ytti via NANOG (Jul 16)
    - Are public DNS a good thing? (was: Re: 1.1.1.1) Marc Binderberger via NANOG (Jul 17)
    - Re: Are public DNS a good thing? (was: Re: 1.1.1.1) Mel Beckman via NANOG (Jul 17)
    - Re: Are public DNS a good thing? Marco Davids (Private) via NANOG (Jul 17)
    - Re: Are public DNS a good thing? (was: Re: 1.1.1.1) Rubens Kuhl via NANOG (Jul 17)
    - Re: Are public DNS a good thing? (was: Re: 1.1.1.1) Paul Ebersman via NANOG (Jul 17)
    - Re: Are public DNS a good thing? (was: Re: 1.1.1.1) Rubens Kuhl via NANOG (Jul 17)
    - Re: Are public DNS a good thing? (was: Re: 1.1.1.1) Paul Ebersman via NANOG (Jul 17)
    - Re: Are public DNS a good thing? (was: Re: 1.1.1.1) Tom Beecher via NANOG (Jul 17)

(Thread continues...)