Re: Re[2]: The in-your-face hijacking example, was: Re: Who is announcing bogons?

["Scott Granados" <scott () wworks net>]

Just to add to this discussion.

I looked at the arin entry again, all of his data including name, address,
telephone number are valid.  925-550-3947 rings directly to Emil personally
I don't care what kind of phone it is cell, landline, ip phone it's him who
answers:).  Its also their published business number.

It matched their trade references and bank data as well on the credit side
<I asked after the last post>.  So sincerely I'm not sure what the problem
is.  Now someone mentioned that LAnet owned the block.  If LAnet calls me up
or sends me proper proof its their block I'd pull the announcement.  Else,
if someone here convinces me that its improper, I'll pull the announcement,
but on the surface I do think he's on ok Ground.  I actually asked Emil to
join the list and discussion on this I'm assuming its on topic.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dan Hollis" <goemon () anime net>
To: "Scott Granados" <scott () wworks net>
Cc: "Richard Cox" <Richard () mandarin com>; <nanog () merit edu>
Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2003 4:22 PM
Subject: Re[2]: The in-your-face hijacking example, was: Re: Who is
announcing bogons?


> On Wed, 30 Apr 2003, Scott Granados wrote:
> > In point of fact a credit check was done including the contacting of
three
> > trade references and some other searches, I can't speak as well to this
as
> > I didn't do the check myself but in this case the  customer passed as I
do
> > know no deposit was required and in many cases they are.  Many times PO
> > boxes are used and PO boxes can be gotten from the PO obviously but also
> > from third parties.
>
> is wworks official position then that this customer is doing nothing
> wrong?
>
> -Dan
> -- 
> [-] Omae no subete no kichi wa ore no mono da. [-]