On Wed, 2008-09-24 at 21:50 -0700, Paul Ferguson wrote: > On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 8:10 PM, William Pitcock > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Esthost are nullrouted as of this morning. Even their administrative > > network is nullrouted. > > > > I think that is a good indication. As I said, if you have any still open > > issues, please let me know. I am talking to these people and they are > > listening. > > > > Okay. Riddle me this: > > Why is Intercage hosting Cernel.net? > > cernel.net -A-> 69.50.176.227 > > AS | IP | AS Name > 27595 | 69.50.176.227 | INTERCAGE - InterCage, Inc.
Except that they are not: it is offline. --- 69.50.176.227 ping statistics ----- 15 packets transmitted, 0 received, 100% packet loss, time 14008ms [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ wget http://69.50.176.227/ 2008-09-25 00:56:54-- http://69.50.176.227/ Connecting to 69.50.176.227:80... failed: Connection timed out. Retrying. --2008-09-25 01:00:04-- (try: 2) http://69.50.176.227/ Connecting to 69.50.176.227:80... failed: Connection timed out. Retrying. --2008-09-25 01:03:15-- (try: 3) http://69.50.176.227/ Connecting to 69.50.176.227:80... ^C 69.50.176.0/24 is nullrouted by Intercage itself and the equipment is powered off. Thanks for playing, but next time you might want to point out something that is actually online. It will certaintly make your argument be more fact-based. Or maybe my problem is that I have a "fact-based world view". William
