nanog mailing list archives

Re: Low-numbered ASes being hijacked? [Re: BGP Update Report]

From: Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2014 14:26:11 -0500

On Mon, 01 Dec 2014 00:53:07 +0900, "Paul S." said:

Do these people never check what exactly they end up originating
outbound due to a config change, if that's really the case?


You're new here, aren't you? :)

Attachment: _bin
Description:

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)
    - Re: Low-numbered ASes being hijacked? [Re: BGP Update Report] Andree Toonk (Nov 30)