nanog mailing list archives
Re: Low-numbered ASes being hijacked? [Re: BGP Update Report]
From: "Paul S." <contact () winterei se>
Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2014 00:53:07 +0900
Do these people never check what exactly they end up originating outbound due to a config change, if that's really the case?
On 11/30/2014 午後 11:24, Pierfrancesco Caci wrote:
"Simon" == Simon Leinen <simon.leinen () switch ch> writes:Simon> Some suspicious paths I'm seeing right now: Simon> 133439 5 Simon> 197945 4 my bet is on someone using the syntax "prepend asnX timesY" on a router that instead wants "prepend asnX asnX...."
Current thread:
- BGP Update Report cidr-report (Nov 07)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- BGP Update Report cidr-report (Nov 14)
- BGP Update Report cidr-report (Nov 21)
- BGP Update Report cidr-report (Nov 28)
- Low-numbered ASes being hijacked? [Re: BGP Update Report] Simon Leinen (Nov 30)
- Re: Low-numbered ASes being hijacked? [Re: BGP Update Report] Pierfrancesco Caci (Nov 30)
- Re: Low-numbered ASes being hijacked? [Re: BGP Update Report] Paul S. (Nov 30)
- Re: Low-numbered ASes being hijacked? [Re: BGP Update Report] Valdis . Kletnieks (Nov 30)
- Re: Low-numbered ASes being hijacked? [Re: BGP Update Report] Stephen Satchell (Nov 30)
- Re: Low-numbered ASes being hijacked? [Re: BGP Update Report] Joe Provo (Nov 30)
- Re: Low-numbered ASes being hijacked? [Re: BGP Update Report] Jay Ashworth (Nov 30)
- Re: Low-numbered ASes being hijacked? [Re: BGP Update Report] Jason Bothe (Nov 30)
- Low-numbered ASes being hijacked? [Re: BGP Update Report] Simon Leinen (Nov 30)
- Re: Low-numbered ASes being hijacked? [Re: BGP Update Report] Andree Toonk (Nov 30)