Cogent & FDCServers: Knowingly aiding and abetting fraud and theft?

Fri Sep 6 20:34:26 UTC 2019

In message <5233B9B9-1BFF-425D-BB8F-E3853703B3F3 at beckman.org>, 
Mel Beckman <mel at beckman.org> wrote:

>A quick check of one of your facts produces unexpected results, so you might
>want to perform more research. According the APNIC, 139.44.0.0/16  does not
>“belong unambiguously to the Port Authority of Melbourne”.

Please, let's not start staring at -one- tree out of the sveeral that
I've talked about, and then start arguing about the shape of the pine
cones on that one tree.  Doing that will give short shrift to the
rather larger forrest that I've tried to expose here.

Is anyone disputing that 168.198.0.0/16 belongs to the Australian
national government, or that AS174, Cogent was, until quite recently,
routing that down to their pals at FDCServers who then were routing
it down to their customer, Elad Cohen?  If so, I ask that people look
up this network in the RIPE Routing history tool and ALSO that folks
have a look at, and explain, the following traceroute from August 23:

    https://pastebin.com/raw/2nJtbwjs

Is anyone disputing that the 165.25.0.0/16 block rightfully belongs to
the City of Cape Town, or that Cogent -continues- even as we speak, to
announce a competing route to it?  If so, I ask any such parties to please
explain this traceroute from August 20th:

    https://pastebin.com/raw/2nJtbwjs

Is anyones disputing that the LOAs that Mr. Cohen has produced in response
to queries about some of the blocks he has stolen, and then routed via
Cogent and FDCServers, are blatant and indeed really bad forgeries?

Is anyone disputing that Mr. Cohen has, in effect, and via the Merit/RADB
data base, claimed rights over more than a million IPv4 addresses, many
of which self-evidently do not belong to him, or that Mr. Cohen's gracious
and helpful providers, FDCSewers and Cogent appear to have effectively
turned a blind eye to all this, or that they continue to do so, even as
we speak?

The Subject line that I used to start this thread may have seemed to some
to be over-the-top and provocative, but to be frank, I think now that I
may have not gone far enough.  Cogent has been announcing a route to
the 165.25.0.0/16 block, which unambiguously belongs to the City of
Cape Town,  At what point does such interference with legitimate
governmental functions an authority, on Cogent's part, cross over from
being merely bad manners and into the realm of criminality?

Regards,
rfg