Charter contact

[Mehmet Akcin]

Hey there

I am looking for a contact in Charter for a 10G wave. Reno > SF or Reno to
> LA.

Please let me know if you know people who may help.

Thanks
-- 
Mehmet
+1-424-298-1903

Re: large path attr

[Randy Bush]

> I feel like I saw this once with large communities, but memory is a
> bit fuzzy.

yes, with this large an ops community, the clue distribution will likely
be long tailed :)

Re: large path attr

[Tom Beecher]

I feel like I saw this once with large communities, but memory is a bit
fuzzy.

On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 15:12 Randy Bush  wrote:

> Feb  7 05:30:12 rpd[1752]: Prefix Send failed ! 103.148.40.0/24
> bgp_rt_trace_too_big_message:1209 path attribute too big. Cannot build
> update.
>
> anyone else seen this one?  another kiddie?
>
> randy
>

Re: large path attr

[Randy Bush]

responding to private email

> Yes, something was up, as seen at the AS22211 openbgpd logger "flight
> recorder". I only looked near the time stamp you had.
> 
> # mrt2bgpdump /pool0/var/log/bgpd/all-in-2020-02-07-05-26 |grep  103.148.40
> BGP4MP|02/07/20 05:30:15|A|66.79.132.1|22211|103.148.40.0/24|12182 174
> 132602 10075 134371 140076 140076 140076 140076 140076 140076 140076 140076
> 140076 140076 140076 140076 140076 140076 140076 140076 140076 140076
> 140076 140076 140076 140076 140076 140076 140076 140076 140076 140076
> ...
> 140076 140076 140076 140076 140076 140076 140076 140076 140076 140076
> 140076 140076 140076 140076 140076|IGP
> 
> BGP4MP|02/07/20 05:30:42|A|66.79.132.1|22211|103.148.40.0/24|12182 2914 174
> 132602 10075 134371 140076 140076 140076 140076 140076 140076 140076 140076
> 140076 140076 140076 140076 140076 140076 140076 140076 140076 140076
> ...

and so on

as140076 is Mir Internet Service in Dhaka

microtik prepend gl!tch?

randy

Re: Tell me about AS19111

[bzs]

Once again I predict the past! It's amazing!

Thanks John.

On February 7, 2020 at 14:48 jcur...@arin.net (John Curran) wrote:
 > Barry - 
 > 
 > 
 > FYI – In addition to a regular financial audit, ARIN periodically has a
 > third-party operational audit conducted of the registry, including random
 > sampling of transactions and detailed review of same. 
 > 
 > The results of the audit are used to both reaffirm registry integrity and
 > have led to improvements in our processes in multiple areas including
 > internal review/signoff practices, transaction logging, and fraud
 > investigation. 
 > 
 > 
 > Thanks,
 > /John
 > 
 > John Curran
 > President and CEO
 > American Registry for Internet Numbers
 > 
 > 
 > On 6 Feb 2020, at 1:38 PM, b...@theworld.com wrote:
 > 
 > 
 > Given events including the IPv4 runout etc perhaps it's long overdue
 > that the RIRs should hire a professional big-name (we used to call
 > them Big 5) accounting firm to audit or at least review IP address,
 > ASN, etc. allocation.
 > 
 > I am not talking about money, I am talking about resource allocation.
 > 
 > That would be a step towards accountability.
 > 
 > It would likely be a lot better than "someone on NANOG noticed a
 > discrepancy let's shout at each other about it for a few days."
 > 
 > The "rules" really aren't that difficult even if the details of
 > technical management can be.
 > 
 > A modern accounting firm could find the talent to grasp how it all
 > should work and review how it has worked and is working.
 > 
 > I've worked with accountants, they know things like what we'd call in
 > a phrase "game theory" (you cut, I choose, etc) regarding resource
 > allocation, memorialization (is the record-keeping broken?), "forcing"
 > organizations to fix outright bugs in rules and record-keeping,
 > internal accountability (e.g., who has access to critical records?
 > what's the process when an error or fraud occurs?), proper reporting,
 > etc.
 > 
 > It wouldn't be cheap.
 > 
 > But as an easy suggestion I'd recommend that ISOC help with the
 > funding for such a project. There could be other sources.
 > 
 > Or possibly, I haven't a clue how the numbers might work, a $10 or $20
 > new annual resource allocation surcharge to underwrite such auditing.
 > 
 > It would be a new and potentially valuable service so, within reason,
 > justified.
 > 
 > --
 >-Barry Shein
 > 
 > Software Tool & Die| b...@theworld.com | http://
 > www.TheWorld.com
 > Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: +1 617-STD-WRLD   | 800-THE-WRLD
 > The World: Since 1989  | A Public Information Utility | *oo*
 > 
 > 


-- 
-Barry Shein

Software Tool & Die| b...@theworld.com | http://www.TheWorld.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: +1 617-STD-WRLD   | 800-THE-WRLD
The World: Since 1989  | A Public Information Utility | *oo*

large path attr

[Randy Bush]

Feb  7 05:30:12 rpd[1752]: Prefix Send failed ! 103.148.40.0/24 
bgp_rt_trace_too_big_message:1209 path attribute too big. Cannot build update.

anyone else seen this one?  another kiddie?

randy

Weekly Routing Table Report

[Routing Analysis Role Account]

This is an automated weekly mailing describing the state of the Internet
Routing Table as seen from APNIC's router in Japan.

The posting is sent to APOPS, NANOG, AfNOG, SANOG, PacNOG, SAFNOG
TZNOG, MENOG, BJNOG, SDNOG, CMNOG, LACNOG and the RIPE Routing WG.

Daily listings are sent to bgp-st...@lists.apnic.net

For historical data, please see http://thyme.rand.apnic.net.

If you have any comments please contact Philip Smith .

Routing Table Report   04:00 +10GMT Sat 08 Feb, 2020

Report Website: http://thyme.rand.apnic.net
Detailed Analysis:  http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/

Analysis Summary


BGP routing table entries examined:  794073
Prefixes after maximum aggregation (per Origin AS):  302321
Deaggregation factor:  2.63
Unique aggregates announced (without unneeded subnets):  388517
Total ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 66960
Prefixes per ASN: 11.86
Origin-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:   57545
Origin ASes announcing only one prefix:   24189
Transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:9415
Transit-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:284
Average AS path length visible in the Internet Routing Table:   4.5
Max AS path length visible:  34
Max AS path prepend of ASN ( 16327)  25
Prefixes from unregistered ASNs in the Routing Table:  1271
Number of instances of unregistered ASNs:  1276
Number of 32-bit ASNs allocated by the RIRs:  30466
Number of 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table:   25070
Prefixes from 32-bit ASNs in the Routing Table:  114954
Number of bogon 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table:25
Special use prefixes present in the Routing Table:1
Prefixes being announced from unallocated address space:   1135
Number of addresses announced to Internet:   2853015424
Equivalent to 170 /8s, 13 /16s and 143 /24s
Percentage of available address space announced:   77.1
Percentage of allocated address space announced:   77.1
Percentage of available address space allocated:  100.0
Percentage of address space in use by end-sites:   99.4
Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations:  266654

APNIC Region Analysis Summary
-

Prefixes being announced by APNIC Region ASes:   210581
Total APNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation:   61335
APNIC Deaggregation factor:3.43
Prefixes being announced from the APNIC address blocks:  203953
Unique aggregates announced from the APNIC address blocks:84920
APNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:   10336
APNIC Prefixes per ASN:   19.73
APNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix:   2851
APNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:   1544
Average APNIC Region AS path length visible:4.6
Max APNIC Region AS path length visible: 26
Number of APNIC region 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table:   5389
Number of APNIC addresses announced to Internet:  768260864
Equivalent to 45 /8s, 202 /16s and 187 /24s
APNIC AS Blocks4608-4864, 7467-7722, 9216-10239, 17408-18431
(pre-ERX allocations)  23552-24575, 37888-38911, 45056-46079, 55296-56319,
   58368-59391, 63488-64098, 64297-64395, 131072-141625
APNIC Address Blocks 1/8,  14/8,  27/8,  36/8,  39/8,  42/8,  43/8,
49/8,  58/8,  59/8,  60/8,  61/8, 101/8, 103/8,
   106/8, 110/8, 111/8, 112/8, 113/8, 114/8, 115/8,
   116/8, 117/8, 118/8, 119/8, 120/8, 121/8, 122/8,
   123/8, 124/8, 125/8, 126/8, 133/8, 150/8, 153/8,
   163/8, 171/8, 175/8, 180/8, 182/8, 183/8, 202/8,
   203/8, 210/8, 211/8, 218/8, 219/8, 220/8, 221/8,
   222/8, 223/8,

ARIN Region Analysis Summary


Prefixes being announced by ARIN Region ASes:233275
Total ARIN prefixes after maximum aggregation:   107407
ARIN Deaggregation factor: 2.17
Prefixes being announced from the ARIN address blocks:   231228
Unique aggregates announced from the ARIN address blocks:116855
ARIN Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:18391
ARIN Prefixes per ASN:12.57
ARIN 

Re: Equinix LA4

[Saku Ytti]

Hey Mike,

It should be cheaper than anything else + XC.

https://www.equinix.com/interconnection-services/equinix-connect/

On Fri, 7 Feb 2020 at 19:12, Mike Hammett  wrote:
>
> How is that priced out compared to a cross connect?
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> Midwest-IX
> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>
> 
> From: "Saku Ytti" 
> To: "Mehmet Akcin" 
> Cc: "nanog" 
> Sent: Friday, February 7, 2020 1:43:48 AM
> Subject: Re: Equinix LA4
>
> Hey there,
>
> > I am looking for 100mbps burstable to 1G (copper preferred) transit in 
> > Equinix LA4 to be used as out of band connectivity. Can do fiber if must.
>
> Would Equinix Connect work?
> https://www.equinix.com/interconnection-services/equinix-connect/
>
> Lot of people in the past have preferred to do some kind of OOB WAN
> goodwill swaps, but it's unclear if anyone should in equinix.
> Considering how difficult support can be on goodwill connections and
> more importantly the Equinix XC prices make their own Connect
> competitively priced.
>
> --
>   ++ytti
>


-- 
  ++ytti

Re: Equinix LA4

[Rob Wcislo]

Or GTT

Get Outlook for iOS

From: NANOG  on behalf of Mehmet Akcin 

Sent: Friday, February 7, 2020 12:14:10 PM
To: Mike Hammett 
Cc: nanog 
Subject: Re: Equinix LA4

Yeah he.net is probably best option

On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 12:12 Mike Hammett 
mailto:na...@ics-il.net>> wrote:
How is that priced out compared to a cross connect?



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com

Midwest-IX
http://www.midwest-ix.com


From: "Saku Ytti" mailto:s...@ytti.fi>>
To: "Mehmet Akcin" mailto:meh...@akcin.net>>
Cc: "nanog" mailto:nanog@nanog.org>>
Sent: Friday, February 7, 2020 1:43:48 AM
Subject: Re: Equinix LA4


Hey there,

> I am looking for 100mbps burstable to 1G (copper preferred) transit in 
> Equinix LA4 to be used as out of band connectivity. Can do fiber if must.

Would Equinix Connect work?
https://www.equinix.com/interconnection-services/equinix-connect/

Lot of people in the past have preferred to do some kind of OOB WAN
goodwill swaps, but it's unclear if anyone should in equinix.
Considering how difficult support can be on goodwill connections and
more importantly the Equinix XC prices make their own Connect
competitively priced.

--
  ++ytti

--
Mehmet
+1-424-298-1903

Re: Tell me about AS19111

[John Levine]

In article <8930.1580963...@segfault.tristatelogic.com> you write:
>>1800vitamins.org has a web site at 12.180.219.234 which looks like
>>they would sell me vitamins should I or my dog need any.
>>
>>Routeviews tells me that IP is in AS19111, routed via AS7018.  AS7018
>>is AT which isn't surprising for a 12/8 address, but ARIN says
>>AS19111 doesn't exist.  Huh?
>
>John you have no idea how many folks are using how many bogon ASNs
>as we speak.  Nobody does. ...

The reason I originally asked about this one is that everything looks
entirely legit other than the ASN.  It appears that the only reason it
is bogus is that the vitamin company isn't very good at remembering to
pay its ARIN bill.

I get the impression that's fairly common, since the practical penalty
for having your ASN fall out of the database is zilch.

R's,
John

Re: Equinix LA4

[Mehmet Akcin]

Yeah he.net is probably best option

On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 12:12 Mike Hammett  wrote:

> How is that priced out compared to a cross connect?
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> Midwest-IX
> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>
> --
> *From: *"Saku Ytti" 
> *To: *"Mehmet Akcin" 
> *Cc: *"nanog" 
> *Sent: *Friday, February 7, 2020 1:43:48 AM
> *Subject: *Re: Equinix LA4
>
>
> Hey there,
>
> > I am looking for 100mbps burstable to 1G (copper preferred) transit in
> Equinix LA4 to be used as out of band connectivity. Can do fiber if must.
>
> Would Equinix Connect work?
> https://www.equinix.com/interconnection-services/equinix-connect/
>
> Lot of people in the past have preferred to do some kind of OOB WAN
> goodwill swaps, but it's unclear if anyone should in equinix.
> Considering how difficult support can be on goodwill connections and
> more importantly the Equinix XC prices make their own Connect
> competitively priced.
>
> --
>   ++ytti
>
> --
Mehmet
+1-424-298-1903

Re: Equinix LA4

[Mike Hammett]

How is that priced out compared to a cross connect? 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

Midwest-IX 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 

- Original Message -

From: "Saku Ytti"  
To: "Mehmet Akcin"  
Cc: "nanog"  
Sent: Friday, February 7, 2020 1:43:48 AM 
Subject: Re: Equinix LA4 

Hey there, 

> I am looking for 100mbps burstable to 1G (copper preferred) transit in 
> Equinix LA4 to be used as out of band connectivity. Can do fiber if must. 

Would Equinix Connect work? 
https://www.equinix.com/interconnection-services/equinix-connect/ 

Lot of people in the past have preferred to do some kind of OOB WAN 
goodwill swaps, but it's unclear if anyone should in equinix. 
Considering how difficult support can be on goodwill connections and 
more importantly the Equinix XC prices make their own Connect 
competitively priced. 

-- 
++ytti 

RE: Equinix LA4

[Robert DeVita]

There really isn’t a cost effective was to do out of band management in Equinix 
or Digital Realty since the XC will cost about as much as the circuit. 

In any event Cogent or HE is your best bet for a cheap Out of Band Circuit.

Rob



Robert DeVita 
Managing Director, Mejeticks



  214-305-2444

  469-441-8864
  radev...@mejeticks.com

 www.mejeticks.com

  2626 Cole Ave, Suite 300, Dallas TX 75204





-Original Message-
From: NANOG  On Behalf Of Saku Ytti
Sent: Friday, February 7, 2020 1:44 AM
To: Mehmet Akcin 
Cc: nanog 
Subject: Re: Equinix LA4

Hey there,

> I am looking for 100mbps burstable to 1G (copper preferred) transit in 
> Equinix LA4 to be used as out of band connectivity. Can do fiber if must.

Would Equinix Connect work?
https://www.equinix.com/interconnection-services/equinix-connect/

Lot of people in the past have preferred to do some kind of OOB WAN goodwill 
swaps, but it's unclear if anyone should in equinix.
Considering how difficult support can be on goodwill connections and more 
importantly the Equinix XC prices make their own Connect competitively priced.

--
  ++ytti

Re: google cloud console is slow

[Stephen Fulton]

Hi Izzy,

Perhaps this is a better discussion for the outages discussion list? 
You should probably also provide more technical details (obfuscated 
src/dst etc).


Stephen

On 2020-02-07 10:38, Izzy Goldstein - TeleGo wrote:

from the US East Cost on Verizon FiOS
google cloud console is extremely slow

--

Izzy Goldstein

Chief Technology Officer

Main: (212) 477-1000 x 2085 

Direct: (929) 477-2085 

Website:www.telego.com 





Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail may contain confidential and/or 
privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient or have 
received this e-mail in error please notify us immediately by email 
reply and destroy this e-mail. Any unauthorized copying, disclosure or 
distribution of the material in this e-mail is strictly forbidden. Any 
views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author 
and do not necessarily represent those of TeleGo (T). Employees of 
TeleGo are expressly required not to make defamatory statements and not 
to infringe or authorize any infringement of copyright or any other 
legal right by email communications. Any such communication is contrary 
to TeleGo policy and outside the scope of the employment of the 
individual concerned. TeleGo will not accept any liability in respect of 
such communication, and the employee responsible will be personally 
liable for any damages or other liability arising.



TeleGo Hosted PBX 

google cloud console is slow

[Izzy Goldstein - TeleGo]

from the US East Cost on Verizon FiOS
google cloud console is extremely slow

-- 

Izzy Goldstein

Chief Technology Officer

Main: (212) 477-1000 x 2085 <(212)%20477-1000>

Direct: (929) 477-2085

Website: www.telego.com 





Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail may contain confidential and/or
privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient or have
received this e-mail in error please notify us immediately by email reply
and destroy this e-mail. Any unauthorized copying, disclosure or
distribution of the material in this e-mail is strictly forbidden. Any
views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author
and do not necessarily represent those of TeleGo (T). Employees of TeleGo
are expressly required not to make defamatory statements and not to
infringe or authorize any infringement of copyright or any other legal
right by email communications. Any such communication is contrary to TeleGo
policy and outside the scope of the employment of the individual concerned.
TeleGo will not accept any liability in respect of such communication, and
the employee responsible will be personally liable for any damages or other
liability arising.


TeleGo Hosted PBX 

Re: Tell me about AS19111

[John Curran]

Barry -

FYI – In addition to a regular financial audit, ARIN periodically has a 
third-party operational audit conducted of the registry, including random 
sampling of transactions and detailed review of same.

The results of the audit are used to both reaffirm registry integrity and have 
led to improvements in our processes in multiple areas including internal 
review/signoff practices, transaction logging, and fraud investigation.

Thanks,
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
American Registry for Internet Numbers

On 6 Feb 2020, at 1:38 PM, b...@theworld.com wrote:


Given events including the IPv4 runout etc perhaps it's long overdue
that the RIRs should hire a professional big-name (we used to call
them Big 5) accounting firm to audit or at least review IP address,
ASN, etc. allocation.

I am not talking about money, I am talking about resource allocation.

That would be a step towards accountability.

It would likely be a lot better than "someone on NANOG noticed a
discrepancy let's shout at each other about it for a few days."

The "rules" really aren't that difficult even if the details of
technical management can be.

A modern accounting firm could find the talent to grasp how it all
should work and review how it has worked and is working.

I've worked with accountants, they know things like what we'd call in
a phrase "game theory" (you cut, I choose, etc) regarding resource
allocation, memorialization (is the record-keeping broken?), "forcing"
organizations to fix outright bugs in rules and record-keeping,
internal accountability (e.g., who has access to critical records?
what's the process when an error or fraud occurs?), proper reporting,
etc.

It wouldn't be cheap.

But as an easy suggestion I'd recommend that ISOC help with the
funding for such a project. There could be other sources.

Or possibly, I haven't a clue how the numbers might work, a $10 or $20
new annual resource allocation surcharge to underwrite such auditing.

It would be a new and potentially valuable service so, within reason,
justified.

--
   -Barry Shein

Software Tool & Die| b...@theworld.com
 | http://www.TheWorld.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: +1 617-STD-WRLD   | 800-THE-WRLD
The World: Since 1989  | A Public Information Utility | *oo*

CISCO 0-day exploits

[Jean | ddostest.me via NANOG]

CDPwn: 5 new zero-day Cisco exploits

https://www.armis.com/cdpwn/

What's the impact on your network? Everything is under control?

Jean

Re: Tell me about AS19111

[Marco Belmonte]

Just imagine how good we would all feel if we came together as a 
community and really did do what Ron suggests below? I would do anything 
to be part of something like that...


On 2/5/2020 11:39 PM, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:

For all of the people who have elected to pick on me for my less
that diplomatic assertion(s), I can only suggest that your time and
effort would be more well spent by looking at the hard data that
I suggested that everyone look at, and then looking to see if any of
the bogus ASNs being used, day in and day out, are being peered
with by your own upstreams, and if so, composing an appropriately
diplomatic email to said upstreams, asking them why they are peering
with bogon ASN(s).

I do not feel that it is a stretch to say that all of this use of
bogon ASNs is arguably even more shameful than the widespread lack
of adherence to BCP 38, owing to the ease with which it may be seen
and documented.  It represents yet another, and equally or perhaps
even more egregious violation of Internet norms which endangers us
all, and all of our customers, every bit as much as the widespread
and inexcusable failures to conform to BCP 38.

The Internet needs to grow up.  This isn't a little government funded
science experiment anymore.  We have a whole planet's full of end users
watching now, and history will not be kind to those who continue to
shirk their responsibilities to the common man in the interests of
lining their own pockets in the short term.


Regards,
rfg

Monetizing IPv4 addresses / DiViNetworks

[Ronald F. Guilmette]

My apologies to all.  I previously posted here some inaccurate information,
which I must now retract and correct.

I incorrectly asserted that "DiViNetworks has received $15 million
USD worth of venture capital from the International Finance Corporation,
a commercial lender and member of the World Bank Group."


https://ifcext.ifc.org/ifcext/pressroom/IFCPressRoom.nsf/0/52F1A9E272AAFAB785257BE80051CB53

In fact, a proper reading of the press release above indicated that IFC
only invested $5 million into DiViNetworks.

Other public reports however suggest that the company has received at least
$15 million USD in venture funding.  It is not immediately clear where the
additional $10 million USD might have come from.

https://pitchbook.com/profiles/company/59066-56
https://www.bizety.com/2015/09/10/cool-startup-divinetworks/

As seen at the pitchbook.com link just above, the company may have used
the following address as a U.S. business address in some instances:
   
1680 Michigan Avenue, Suite 700
Miami Beach, FL 33139

This location appears to be associated with "virtual office" rentals:


https://www.davincivirtual.com/loc/us/florida/miami-beach-virtual-offices/facility-1149

On the company's own web site, it provides what would appear to be its one
and only business address:

https://divinetworks.com/

10153 1/2 Riverside Drive #526
Los Angeles, CA

The above address would appear to be home to a business known as "Mailbox
Toluca Lake", which may or may not be a FedEx authorized shipping center:

   https://local.fedex.com/ca/los-angeles/61623/

The above addresses in Miami and Los Angeles would appear to be inconsistant
with other easly findable online documents, including the IFC press release
linked to above, which explicitly asserts that the company is located in
Israel.  It is not immediately clear why an Israeli company would have
need of either (a) a virtual office in Miami or (b) a mail drop in Los
Angeles.

I have been unable to find any evidence of any current or historical state-
level business registration for either "Divi Networks" or "DiviNetworks" or
"Divi Group" in either Florida or California.  The operation of business
addresses in either or both states without registration may possibly be a
violation of law in those states.  It is certainly impossible for any
business to file a state-level business tax return in any state in which
that business is not registered, due to the lack of the required state
business registration number which would have to appear on the tax return
in question.

As discussed in the IFC funding press release, the company appears to
have begun life with the eminently laudable goal to "increase Internet
transmission capacities and free up congested internet connections
in 21 developing countries..."  This is certainly a commendable goal by
anyone's standards, and one fully worthy of funding from the commercial
lending arm of the World Bank.

That having been said, it is certainly within the realm of possibility
that this initial business model may perhaps not have stood the test
of time, and that providing services to developing economies may not have
produced sufficent returns to keep the enterprise viable on a long term
basis.

I have found at least some evidence to suggest that the company may, at
present, be pursuing a different business model.

In the current era, there are two ways in which any party who can beg,
borrow, or steal any large swath of IPv4 address can quickly and effectively
monetize those addresses.  (And these methods are not entirely exclusive
of one another.)

The traditional way of monetizing any large block of IPv4 addresses which
the lessor does not have, or plan to have, a long term interest in is
simply to sub-lease the addresses to snowshoe spammers.  Unfortunately for
those involved, if this strategy is pursued to the exclusion of any other
it renders the IP addresses in question a "wasting asset".  Their value
declines over time as they become ever more widely blacklisted and thus
ever more ineffective for spamming purposes.

An alternative monetization strategy which has become increasingly
prevalent and widspread in recent years and which does not, generally
speaking, engender this "wasting asset" problem (and which also,
conveniently, tends to attract entirely less public attention and
scrutiny) is to "dress up" the IP block(s) in question, to the extent
possible, via relevant RIR WHOIS records, in order to make them appear
to be networks containing only Internet end-user "eyeballs".  Specifically,
the term "residential" is typically used as an integral part of these
subterfuges, and a simple google search for "residential proxies" will,
at present, turn up a veritable plethora of companies offering as a
service exactly such fradulently "dressed up" IPv4 addresses, complete
with pre-configured proxy services.  (An alternative google search that
also gives a window into this little known