Abuse procedures... Reality Checks

Sat Apr 7 23:30:59 UTC 2007

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Apr 7, 2007, at 11:00 PM, Fergie wrote:

> I would think that it's actually very easy to do when
> sub-allocations are SWIP'ed.

Not that I'm really defending this policy, but sub-allocations are  
very often not SWIPed.  I'd say 75% or more of the time I'm looking a  
problem IP address it is part of a /19 or larger block with no sub- 
allocation.

For example, I know for a fact that 70.167.38.132 is part of a  
netblock assigned to a business (I believe it is a /28 or /27).  It  
is routed to them over a DS1 or similar cable equivalent.  They run a  
handful of servers behind including public hosting a half dozen  
corporate web sites and a mail server.  Clearly these addresses have  
been assigned to this business.

Yet:

owenc at corp:~$ whois 70.167.38.132Cox Communications Inc. NETBLK-COX- 
ATLANTA-10 (NET-70-160-0-0-1)
                                   70.160.0.0 - 70.191.255.255
Cox Communications Inc. NETBLK-WI-OHFC-70-167-32-0 (NET-70-167-32-0-1)
                                   70.167.32.0 - 70.167.63.255

No rwhois server available.

And Cox is actually better than some.  That's only a /19.  I've seen  
much larger blocks than this.  Somehow I doubt if we pulled that with  
our /20 I doubt we'd have a /19 now.

Chris

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Chris Owen         ~ Garden City (620) 275-1900 ~  Lottery (noun):
President          ~ Wichita     (316) 858-3000 ~    A stupidity tax
Hubris Communications Inc      www.hubris.net
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFGGCmzElUlCLUT2d0RAo2fAJwPXyy6LldTs7hEwHH+KkJ9fF9EewCfTyIf
0BHI2gDJX/s3FuZlLWkWwiM=
=l33X
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----