RE: 213.123.192.0/20 | 193.179.160.0/22 | 174.132.0.0/15 | 65.75.128.0/18

["Gavin Pearce" <Gavin.Pearce () 3seven9 com>]

Just a quick update to the below message, I have a contact for The
Planet, if anyone has a contact for any of the following, would be much
appreciated:

64.167.200.160/29 (SBCIS-1001120-113647) [new]
213.123.192.0/20 (BT-ADSL)
193.179.160.0/22 (KULAJ-NET)
65.75.128.0/18 (MSG-65-75-128-0)

Many thanks,
Gavin

-----Original Message-----
From: Gavin Pearce [mailto:Gavin.Pearce () 3seven9 com] 
Sent: 15 March 2011 11:48
To: NANOG list
Subject: 213.123.192.0/20 | 193.179.160.0/22 | 174.132.0.0/15 |
65.75.128.0/18

Morning all - anyone here responsible for any of the following:

Abuse/Technical contacts gone unanswered for each (mailed 1 - 2 months
ago). *sigh*

Getting multiple brute force and/or spam from single IPs within those
ranges against different devices on different dates.

Gav

-----Original Message-----
From: Masato YAMANISHI [mailto:myamanis () japan-telecom com] 
Sent: 14 March 2011 16:16
To: 'Marshall Eubanks'; 'NANOG list'
Subject: RE: Rush to Fix Quake-Damaged Undersea Cables

Hi Marshall and all,

> About half of the existing cables running across the Pacific 
> are damaged ...
>
> It that realistic ? That seems like much more damage than 
> anything I have heard or seen.

Yes, it's definetely true.

Rgs,
Masato 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marshall Eubanks [mailto:tme () americafree tv] 
> Sent: Monday, March 14, 2011 8:54 AM
> To: NANOG list
> Subject: Rush to Fix Quake-Damaged Undersea Cables
>
> In this WSJ article
>
> http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100014240527487048936045761999
> 52421569210.html
>
> or
>
> http://on.wsj.com/gaPk8V 
>
> This caught my eye :
>
> About half of the existing cables running across the Pacific 
> are damaged ...
>
> It that realistic ? That seems like much more damage than 
> anything I have heard or seen.
>
> Regards
> Marshall