PCH.net questions and thoughts - Re: Prefix hijacking by AS20115

Tue Sep 29 19:35:56 UTC 2015

We have a big, red rotary phone that sits in our NOC that we have 
attached to a VoIP box just to use for that. :)

On 9/29/2015 10:05 AM, Bob Evans wrote:
> Nice of you to check Jim. This brings up the old idea - A long time ago I
> had an INOC phone by PCH.NET - It never rang, as we filter our outbound
> with detail everywhere we announce. ISPs need to provide us their address
> list.
>
> And the few times I needed to use it , no one ever answered. ( It was a
> decade ago before NANOG membership.) So after a while I too ignored it.
> Maybe this was an idea ahead of it's time ? From this painful mishap, it
> could have been a great solution for NOC Engineers to help each. I find
> peeringdb often outdated as companies change around and sluggish return
> call if at all.  Most are like a sales line number post.
>
> I see now a long list of registered networks in the PCH directory. Are
> networks actually paying attention and using it. Is it time to take
> another look ?  At midnight in your organization could you get a NOC
> person with " proper BGP skills and access " to answer and care about a
> bad announcement ?
>
> https://inoc-dba-web.pch.net/inoc-dba/console.cgi?op=show_pubdir&list=org
>   Link above shows lots more networks listed on the
>   INOC-DBA Public Directory: Organizations
>
> But have you used it? Did it work for you when you needed it ?
> Any further comments are appreciated.
>
> This seems like a very good proper civil approach - maybe this or
> something like it ARIN might help promote and endorse as a benefit to the
> community ? Be nice if with the cash they did something simple like this
> and got all of us to use it? Special line forwarding ? A Emergency Only
> NOC App for our phones for just this kind of situation - one that
> registers a specific ASN and pin code we set on the registration page ?
>
> Thank You
> Bob Evans
> CTO
>
>
>
>
>>
>> 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.
>>
>>
>
>

-- 
================================================================
Aaron Wendel
Chief Technical Officer
Wholesale Internet, Inc. (AS 32097)
(816)550-9030
http://www.wholesaleinternet.com
================================================================