nanog mailing list archives
Re: odd hijack
From: "Josh Karlin" <karlinjf () cs unm edu>
Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2006 22:59:20 -0700
Wouldn't they want to hijack more specifics to spam? I doubt much of that space is going to correctly route for spamming purposes. On 11/9/06, Hank Nussbacher <hank () efes iucc ac il> wrote:
On Thu, 9 Nov 2006, Josh Karlin wrote: > Here is one that is somewhat the opposite, the AS announced a > significant portion of IANA allocated space. Note, they are large > blocks and as such probably did not cause much damage because most > networks announce more specifics. My question to the community is, > what kind of misconfiguration could cause this set of prefixes to be > announced? I asked the AS responsible, but have not had a response. Misconfiguration? :-) That's a nice word for spammer. See Joe's PPT at: http://www.uoregon.edu/~joe/maawg8/maawg8.ppt AS29449 is not the problem. It is the upstreams of AS5602 (KPNQwest Italia) and AS286 (KPN) that let this crap leak. -Hank Nussbacher http://www.interall.co.il
Current thread:
- odd hijack Josh Karlin (Nov 09)
- Re: odd hijack Hank Nussbacher (Nov 09)
- Re: odd hijack Josh Karlin (Nov 09)
- Re: odd hijack Hank Nussbacher (Nov 10)
- Re: odd hijack steve (Nov 10)
- Re: odd hijack Nick Feamster (Nov 10)
- Re: odd hijack Randy Bush (Nov 10)
- Re: odd hijack Josh Karlin (Nov 10)
- Re: odd hijack Randy Bush (Nov 10)
- Re: odd hijack Josh Karlin (Nov 09)
- Re: odd hijack Nick Feamster (Nov 10)
- Re: odd hijack Hank Nussbacher (Nov 09)