Dear all, We would like to inform you that the RIPE NCC has de-registered 188.64.224.0/21 on 10 July 2018 according to our published procedures. We are in contact with the relevant party.
Best Regards, Henriette van Ingen Customer Services RIPE NCC > On 13 Jul 2018, at 11:54, denis walker via db-wg <db-wg@ripe.net> wrote: > > Hi Guys > > I am sure everyone will disagree with me, but this shows (to me) why it would > be better to have one authoritative, accurate, trusted, distributed IRR > managed by the 5 RIRs than many independent/commercial IRRs with non > authenticated data. > > cheers > denis > co-chair DB-WG > > > > From: Aftab Siddiqui via db-wg <db-wg@ripe.net> > To: Geoff Huston <g...@apnic.net> > Cc: RIPE Database Working Group <db-wg@ripe.net> > Sent: Thursday, 12 July 2018, 18:40 > Subject: Re: [db-wg] Source GRS vs RIPE > > Hi Geoff, > > Of course Twitter is doing nothing uniquely unusual in this respect, as these > are just 7 examples from a pool of some 300 announcements of unallocated > address space (a list of such bogons can be found at > http://www.cidr-report.org/as2.0/#Bogons > <http://www.cidr-report.org/as2.0/#Bogons>) > > :) > > > - Why is Twitter announcing these prefixes? > > I have no idea. Something has gone wrong here and the address has come > back to the RIR and Twitter apper to be unaware of this. > > No, Twitter is absolutely aware of this issue, I alerted their NOC when I got > the result this morning from CIDR report (yes, I scrop your data daily) but > unfortunately there response was "This prefix is valid and owned by us in > RIPE region. Please do your homework before making incorrect accusations." > But atleast I tried. > > - How and why is this prefix in RADB, given that it is unallocated space? > > Good question - I wonder what periodic checks the RADB undertakes on the > data held in its registry? > > No idea, it should be triggered right away when the RIR, who is the authentic > source of these resources marked them "Unalloacted". But in a perfect world. > > - Why do upstream AS’s accept these advertised prefixes? > > Maybe they chose to believe that RADB performs robust periodic integrity > checks? Or <insert reason here>? > > Yes, mostly follow RADB. > > > Geoff > > > > > > >
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
