Hijacked Network Ranges

Mark Tinka mtinka at globaltransit.net
Mon Feb 6 05:07:39 UTC 2012

On Monday, February 06, 2012 12:26:51 PM Suresh 
Ramasubramanian wrote:

> I had this happen to me in 2008 -
> http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/nanog/users/110097
> Total pain in the ass when it does happen.  Funnily
> enough in that case it was another downstream of the
> same ISP who was pulling this stunt ..

Clearly the joy of running a clean network is not shared by 
all :-).

Yes, it is a little bit of extra hassle having to update 
filters when your downstreams make change requests 
(including verification, e.t.c.). But when some of our 
upstreams make us go through this, I'm much happier they do 
than they if they didn't. Some are even asking us to "fax" 
documents of such requests; a little extreme, but okay, I'll 
bite :-).

We do have some upstreams who are pretty lax about this. But 
we certainly are not, and as a result, are yet to put one of 
our customers or the Internet in jeopardy because we let one 
through the cracks.

It's 2012, we really shouldn't be seeing this type of thing 
anymore, particularly after what happened in Pakistan.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20120206/1b01d2e1/attachment.sig>

More information about the NANOG mailing list