2001:590::/32 announced by both AS4436 (nLayer) and AS4474 (Global Village, no contact in whois, but seems to be nLayer...)

Mailman List Mirror (Read Only)
1

[cc: to hostmaster@arin.net, maybe now it will get their
attention instead of going into /dev/null]

This is an odd thing to do because you don't say
what action you would like ARIN to take.
What do you think ARIN should do?

ASHandle: AS4474
Comment: The information for this ASN has been reported to
Comment: be invalid. ARIN has attempted to obtain updated data, but

has

Comment: been unsuccessful.

Clearly ARIN has already done something about AS4474.
So what else do you think they should do?

Note that you might want to take this type of
discussion onto the ARIN Public Policy
mailing list which is open to anyone whether
they are an ARIN member or not.

--Michael Dillon

2

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

>[cc: to hostmaster@arin.net, maybe now it will get their
>attention instead of going into /dev/null]

This is an odd thing to do because you don't say
what action you would like ARIN to take.
What do you think ARIN should do?

Maybe not clear from the message I sent to NANOG,
but which should be clear to ARIN:
Update the AS4474 contact information.

Apparently nLayer is using it, thus they should be
listed there. Then again it doesn't help as they
are not reachable through the contact address
(noc@nlayer.net) provided in the AS4436 object.
One does get a XML ticket number back though.
But no response whatsoever, except now from a
customer of theirs.

>ASHandle: AS4474
>Comment: The information for this ASN has been reported to
>Comment: be invalid. ARIN has attempted to obtain updated
data, but
has
>Comment: been unsuccessful.

Clearly ARIN has already done something about AS4474.

Yup, stating that the ASN is in a completely uncontactable
state, which is what I mentioned.

RegDate: 1995-03-08
Updated: 2003-07-31

Thus from those two dates we can say that it has not
been contactable for over almost a year.

So what else do you think they should do?

Contact nLayer and see what they are now doing with this ASN.

Note that you might want to take this type of
discussion onto the ARIN Public Policy
mailing list which is open to anyone whether
they are an ARIN member or not.
https://www.arin.net/participate/community/mailing_lists/

Yes, I am aware of this list and also saw your proposal
for making sure that objects that are in the ARIN registry
also contain valid and contactable information.

For people not having seen the petion for the proposal:
http://www.arin.net/mailing_lists/ppml/2593.html

The above case makes your point clear very well as nLayer
seems not to be available to comments on their noc@nlayer.net
address _and_ they are using an ASN which is shown to be
not contactable at all.

I would add to the proposal that resources, thus ASN's/inet[6]num's
and others that have been allocated at one point and when
trying to verify the contacts for those addresses seem
to be unreachable should be giving a month to respond and
if not a public message should be sent out that the resource
has been revoked tracing the origins of that resource to
find organisations that are peering/accepting that resource
and contact them to see if they have a contact for that resource.

If a company is unable to respond in a month it is in a
very very bad shape and should not be seen as a responsible
entity on the internet.

Greets,
Jeroen

3

Before you started a rant on nanog@merit.edu about this inconsistent-as
problem on an inet6 route, did you think about posting a polite,
"Please, someone from nlayer, contact me off-list," message; or how
about an email to the inet6 carrier(s) from which you learnt the routes?

It seems to me that you've taken an issue which could've been handled in
a polite manner, and turned it into an nlayer-bashing thread. You have:

1) encouraged nlayer's peers to depeer them
2) accused nlayer of being spammers
3) forwarded private corrospondence you received from third parties in
response to your original post back to nanog@merit.edu as well as the
hostmaster@arin.net role account, as if the ARIN staff have nothing
better to do than read your complaint about an AS# they have already
marked as having invalid contact information.

I think I prefer reading about the IRC packet kiddies. If OseK would
care to lend his unique perspective and considerable insight to this
thread, I would be most grateful.

4

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Jeff S Wheeler wrote:

Before you started a rant on nanog@merit.edu about this
inconsistent-as problem on an inet6 route, did you think about posting a polite,
"Please, someone from nlayer, contact me off-list," message; or how
about an email to the inet6 carrier(s) from which you learnt
the routes?

Which has been done already last year on this very list
when it was already pointed out that they where not contactable.
Yes, I checked the archives.

As for the 'inet6 carrier' I learn the routes from, which of the 42?
See Ghost Route Hunter :: SixXS - IPv6 Deployment & Tunnel Broker for more information.
Indeed we monitor the IPv6 routes to find & fix these anomalies
where possible. Someone has to do the dirty job.
Like I mentioned on the list Powerdcom, one of their upstreams,
confirmed that nLayer was sending them the prefiix using AS4474.

Just to be sure, it is also visible in RIS (http://ris.ripe.net)
and on RouteViews.

It seems to me that you've taken an issue which could've been
handled in a polite manner, and turned it into an nlayer-bashing thread.

If they would simply respond to inquiries that are sent to the
contact address given in the whois for their ASN it wouldn't
need to come to that. Also I have no intention on any bashing
whatsoever as that is totally uncalled for and doesn't do any
good either.

They haven't responded to this inquiry yet either.
This was the North American Network Operators Group list wasn't it?

You have:

1) encouraged nlayer's peers to depeer them

You mean that sentence at the bottom of the message clearly
explaining the situation asking their peers to consider trying
to contact them and if not possible to depeer? Which *IS* a
normal action that ISP's should take when they cannot even
reach a peer. Or do you simply let them linger away?
You sound like I can force everyone to decide their network
policy for them. I don't think so, I don't even want that.

2) accused nlayer of being spammers

Which they have proven to be, see last years NANOG threads.

3) forwarded private corrospondence you received from third parties

Which is indeed not such a polite thing to do, but was neccesary
to be able to point out that their 'customers' do know about nLayer
using an ASN that has been marked as a spam source since last year.

response to your original post back to nanog@merit.edu as well as the
hostmaster@arin.net role account, as if the ARIN staff have nothing
better to do than read your complaint about an AS# they have already
marked as having invalid contact information.

For which they can now fill in the blanks as at least their customers
and one of their upstream peers have mentioned that they are using it.

I think I prefer reading about the IRC packet kiddies.

Then use your blacklist and block message from me (jeroen@unfix.org)
or using this subject. Quite easy isn't it?

If OseK would
care to lend his unique perspective and considerable insight to this
thread, I would be most grateful.

Sorry, but I guess you are confusing the humor list with NANOG.
Apparently I hit quite a hot spot seeing some of the 'nice' 'private'
replies being sent to me by 'customers' of nLayer.

I wonder why there even is an internet if one can't even make a notice
of some weird usage of Internet resources.

But this subject is about why an ASN that is marked as uncontactable
which also has been seen as a big spam source is being used by a
entity which seems to be uncontactable, I am still waiting for their
response and I am quite sure these messages have reached them by now.
Or are they still 'migrating' from their spam/hijacked ASN to their own?

Greets,
Jeroen