Yeah, I know a couple of people who have thrown massive peeringdb operations up just to make them look big but their routing table analysis looks nothing like what they say they have.
James W. Breeden Managing Partner [cid:3c34773f-9c3e-42cf-87ba-144ee1fa163f] Arenal Group: Arenal Consulting Group | Acilis Telecom | Pines Media | Atheral | BlueNinja PO Box 1063 | Smithville, TX 78957 Email: ja...@arenalgroup.co<mailto:ja...@arenalgroup.co> | office 512.360.0000 | cell 512.304.0745 | www.arenalgroup.co<http://www.arenalgroup.co/> Executive Assistant: Chelsea Nichols: chel...@arenalgroup.co | 737.302.8742 ________________________________ From: NANOG <nanog-bounces+james=arenalgroup...@nanog.org> on behalf of Eric Kuhnke <eric.kuh...@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, March 4, 2021 6:14 PM To: nanog@nanog.org list <nanog@nanog.org> Subject: Is there an established method for reporting/getting removed a company with 100% false peeringdb entries? First, take a look at this: https://www.peeringdb.com/asn/18894 Now look at these (or use your own BGP table analysis tools): https://bgp.he.net/AS18894 https://stat.ripe.net/18894 The claimed prefixes announced, traffic levels and POPs appear to have no correlation with reality in global v4/v6 BGP tables. It is also noteworthy that I have inquired with a number of persons I know who are active in network engineering in NYC, and nobody has ever encountered this company.
