some friends and i were talking about recent routing cfs, and found we
needed a clearer taxonomy. i throw this out.
leak - i receive P and send it on to folk to whom i should not send
it for business reasons (transit, peer, ...)
mis-origination - i originate P when i do not own it
hijack - an intentional mis-origination
7007 - i receive P (or some sub/superset), process it in some way
(likely through my igp), and re-originate it, or part of it,
as my own
we need a name for 7007 other then vinnie
randy
7007 - i receive P (or some sub/superset), process it in some way
(likely through my igp), and re-originate it, or part of it,
as my own
we need a name for 7007 other then vinnie
Laundered leak?
how about re-origination?
might be misleading in case you don't re-originate P exactly but only
"part of it".
What about "origin scrubbing".
Cheers
matthias
+1 Mis-distribution. or may be Mis-redistribution
Leak, Mis-origination, Hijack.. they all have something in common i.e.
#culprit
but re-origination sounds pretty legitimate.
how about re-origination?
+1 Mis-distribution. or may be Mis-redistribution
you lost the part of the language which made clear that the *origin* has
been changed.
randy
mis-origination. When you non-maliciously announce P as if you own it
(even though you do not) the exact details of how you screwed the
pooch are not externally important. And we have enough obscure names
for things as it is.
-Bill
Reorigination?
tried that and folk have been pushing back
Mis-re-origination?
remiss-origination? 
For that matter, just call it a hijack like it is. Don't legitimize
originating a prefix you don't own by giving it an innocuous name.
-Bill
El 11/18/2015 a las 7:16 AM, Randy Bush escribi�:
how about re-origination?
+1 Mis-distribution. or may be Mis-redistribution
you lost the part of the language which made clear that the *origin* has
been changed.
mutant?
So probably it should be structured like this:
_________ leak
/
hijack ----------------- mis-origination (which should be better described as: I originate P when I don't have the right to)
\__________ origin scrubbing (I like that)
It's a hijack (the result) in any case. If you want to differentiate between malice and stupidity/ignorance just call it "malicious hijack" opposed to "accidental hijack". And then list the cause (leak, mis-origination, origin scrubbing)
Cheers,
Mat
Hi Mat,
I object to jargon on general principle. Excessive jargon makes
technical disciplines needlessly inaccessible to folks who aren't
steeped in the lore.
Now and then there's a concept of such routine utility within the
discipline that it's worth abbreviating into a word or short phrase.
In that case, words that imply the concept are a good choice. Route
Hijack is a good example of this.
Creating jargon down in the weeds, though, that's a bad thing. Unwise.
Something to be deliberately avoided.
Regards,
Bill Herrin
'AS 7007' is jargon to those unaware of the history and context.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/AS_7007_incident
He can thank me later 
Stefan Fouant
JNCIE-SEC, JNCIE-SP, JNCIE-ENT, JNCI
m (703) 625-6243
I think Tony's on the right track here. I vote we call this "Route
Laundering", the people who do it "Route Launderers", and the routes
themselves "Laundered Routes".
I actually had a little trouble spelling the different forms of
laundering. So I looked them up..
----"I can't believe what a bunch of nerds we are. We're looking up "money
laundering" in a dictionary."
Casey Russell
Network Engineer
Kansas Research and Education Network
2029 Becker Drive, Suite 282
Lawrence, KS 66047
(785)856-9820 ext 9809
crussell@kanren.net
Laundered route
I like it.
Or re-originated laundered route (it has more meaning but a bit too long)
.as