Prefix hijacking by AS20115

Tue Sep 29 14:26:48 UTC 2015

On 9/28/15, 10:24 PM, "NANOG on behalf of Seth Mattinen"
<nanog-bounces at nanog.org on behalf of sethm at rollernet.us> wrote:

>On 9/28/15 20:19, Martin Hannigan wrote:
>>
>>Is this related to 104.73.161.0/24? That's ours. :-)
>>
>>We'll take a look and get back to you.  Thanks for caring!
>>
>
>
>Yep, that's one of the affected prefixes.
>
>~Seth
Hi Seth, which market was this occurring?  Was this already removed?  I'm
not seeing it this morning.  I would like to figure out what went wrong
here.  We shouldn't be nailing up any static configuration to have caused
a situation like this.