Hi Ronald On 06/11/2015 00:58, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
In message <563BDB1C.4020408@yahoo.co.uk>, denis <ripedenis@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
On 05/11/2015 21:33, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
In message <637758753.2826426.1446595528880.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>, ripedenis@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
With regards to this specific incident (and this specific set of what looks to be 3 inter-related rogue ASNs) I myself don't really care which 1/5th of the world they are stealing IP space from. I just want to know who they really are. The region they are stealing from (at the moment) is almost irrelevant. By tomorrow, they'll be stealing from AFRINIC, and then from LACNIC the day afrer that.
This really does matter. Even with a valid RIPE ASN they cannot 'steal' RIPE address space.
Really???
If so, that's great news!
Did everyone finally agree to use only fully authenticated route announcement protocols while I was sleeping?? Or is BGP fundamentally still wide open?
I am only concerned with the RIPE Database and making sure what is in there is properly authenticated. cheers denis
When it comes to getting an ASN the AUT-NUM does require reference to a PERSON/ROLE object. But you can pick any PERSON or ROLE object in the database and reference them. Technically there is no cross checking. The 'owner' of those objects will not get notified. So unless the RIPE NCC questions your choice of objects all the contact data in those objects will be perfectly valid. They just have no relationship with you.
I would like to thank you for explaining this to me. I really didn't know this. I _would_ actually thank you for bringing this to my attention, but I'm really feeling very unwell all of of sudden. I think that I may vomit. Plese excuse me. I hope to be back later.
Regards, rfg