[Community-Discuss] Cloud Innovation Displays Very Poor, If Not Criminal, Netizenship
Gregoire EHOUMI
gregoire.ehoumi at yahoo.fr
Wed May 27 14:21:16 UTC 2020
Hi Owen,As Dr. Paulos has clarified to you indeed, James referred to the accepted technical terms used to IP management.Your reference to reverse dns delegation is irrelevant as we are not discussing reverse DNS name space.Thanks for reminding us the definition of “assignment” from section 2.6 of the CPM.2.6 referred to:1- an IP address block given by an LIR to its end-users for their own usage. 2- delegate address space to an ISP or End User for specific use within the Internet infrastructure they operate. 3- Assignments must only be made for specific purposes documented by specific organisations and are not to be sub-assigned to other parties.How come a block which is “delegated” to Link Infinity Technology Limited by cloud innovation got delegated to IPDC By Link Infinity and then “delegated” to a customer by IPDC according to documents provided by Cloud innovation?A clear violation of policies.-- Gregoire
-------- Original message --------From: Dr P Nyirenda <paulos at sdnp.org.mw> Date: 2020-05-27 5:09 a.m. (GMT-05:00) To: Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com>, community-discuss at afrinic.net Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Cloud Innovation Displays Very Poor, If Not Criminal, Netizenship
On 27 May 2020 at 0:46, Owen DeLong wrote:
> On May 26, 2020, at 08:27 , James <james.chirwa at afrinic.net> wrote:
>
> Dear Gregoire,
>
> Let me first of all thank you for sharing your concern as well as seeking clarification regarding
> the matter under hand.
> You have sought from AFRINIC an explanation as regard the term “ delegation of IP block”.
> As far as AFRINIC is concerned , it does not practice “ delegation of IP Block”. Its handling
> of IP Blocks involves only allocation, sub-allocation or assignment .
>
> In this context, delegation is used as a superset of the terms allocation, sub-allocation, and
> assignment.
Mmmm ... I am with James Chirwa on this one. I think allowing "
superset of the terms
" in
ploicy documents will lead to major confusion where the need to be precise is paramount.
> From the dictionary:
Policy documents contain a section on definitions that are precisely put there to avoid
common dictionary definitions like these, specifically to avoid confusion.
> ... cut ... <
> When number resources are allocated, sub-allocated, or assigned, the RIR, NIR, or LIR is, in fact,
> committing the administrative functions
> over said addresses to the recipient.
>
> This is well understood throughout the IP using community and I am surprised by James
> statement, especially in light of the following:
>
> https://www.afrinic.net/services/123-afrinic-policy-for-reverse-delegation-on-allocated-ip-addresse
> s
This applies to DNS and not to IP address allocations and/or assignments.
I would like to refer you to extensive work done by the CCNSO Framework of Interpretation
Working Group (FOIWG) which did a lot of work in this area of DNS and produced its report
in 2014, see: https://ccnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/filefield_46435/foi-final-07oct14-en.pdf
We did this work in that working group to avoid this kind of confusion that you appear to have
here when using such words as "delegation" in identifiers.
> And of course, CPM 2.6: (https://afrinic.net/policy/manual )
>
> 2.6 Assignment
> An assignment is an IP address block given by an LIR to its end-users for their own usage. To
> "assign" means to delegate address space to an ISP or End User for specific use within the
> Internet infrastructure they operate. Assignments must only be made for specific purposes
> documented by specific organisations and are not to be sub-assigned to other parties.
The policy document here refers to the action "
by an LIR" and not that of an RIR, lets not
confuse the two.
Regards,
Paulos
======================
Dr Paulos B Nyirenda
NIC.MW & .mw ccTLD
http://www.registrar.mw
Tel: +265-(0)-882 089 166
Cell: +265-(0)-888-824787
WhatsApp: +265-(0)-887386433
> Owen
>
> You may contact the operator/member who has utilised the said term for more clarification.
> Regards,
> James
> On 23/05/2020 18:21, Gregoire EHOUMI via Community-Discuss wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Thanks Mark for exposing the details of the SEACOM AS37353 hijacking.
>
> I carefully read your report and also the Cloud Innovation Limited quick response
> including their attachments as justifications.
>
> I note that;
>
> ⁃ the service contract with Cloud Innovation covering the announcement of their
> prefixes by SEACOM AS37353 was terminated by SEACOM.
>
> ⁃ some stale IRR route objects existed after termination of the contract.
>
> ⁃ through some multiple layer distribution an organisation in Manila Philippines was
> “delegated“ an IP block from Cloud Innovation address space.
>
> ⁃ both upstream ISP and the customer in Manila set up a BGP session using
> SEACOM's AS37353 as the ASN of the Manila customer.
>
> ⁃ there was a prompt reaction from the involved parties that included apologies to
> SEACOM and the wider internet community.
>
> ⁃ there were promises from said parties to be a better netizen which would mean,
> them not hijacking other networks ASN's.
>
> ⁃ there was clear refusal to disclose the details of the customer in Manila Philippines
> who hijacked the affected SEACOM ASN.
>
> All put together, demonstrates that what happened was an impersonation and not a
> BGP configuration error, nor an oversight in checking the right to use of the SEACOM
> ASN.
>
> 1. Why is it that the real customer did not bother presenting its apologies to the
> community
>
> 2. Why is there refusal to reveal customer’s details?
>
> 3. Why is it that the said prefix is no longer seen in the routing table originated by the
> genius ASN or any other ASN?
>
> 4. Which networks were involved and what happened to the end users?
>
> Can someone from AFRINIC explain what “delegation of IP block” mean?
>
> Note: The self organised Internet knows how to deal with bad net citizens.!
>
> Best regards
> Gregoire Ehoumi
>
>
> -------- Original message --------
> From: Lu Heng <h.lu at anytimechinese.com>
> Date: 2020-05-09 5:41 a.m. (GMT-05:00)
> To: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>
> Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Cloud Innovation Displays Very Poor, If Not
> Criminal, Netizenship
>
> To whom it may concern,
>
> On May 8, Mark Think posted a claim to multiple lists that Cloud Innovation was
> abusing an ASN (37353) that didn’t belong to them (Cloud Innovation) but rather
> belonged to Seacom through their acquisition of MacroLAN.
>
> While we regret this unfortunate incident, Mark’s claims that it was criminal or bad
> netizenship on the part of Cloud Innovation is without foundation and utterly incorrect.
>
> As shown below in the attached document from Paul Wollner(Ex-CTO of
> Macrolan who created IRR routes to allow Macrolan to announce Cloud
> Innovation's prefix); letter from Link Infinity International Ltd. (Link Infinity), A
> customer of Cloud Innovation; and attached LOA from LARUS authorizing
> IPDC Solutions to announce the prefix with origin AS134190. And a Letter
> from IPDC. This was an innocent mistake committed by third parties and had
> nothing to do with any action by Cloud Innovation or LARUS.
>
> Here’s what happened:
>
> Cloud Innovation delegated a /24 to Link Infinity, an ISP in December
> 2019.
>
> Link Infinity further delegated that same /24 to IPDC and asked Cloud innovation
> to issue an LOA, which we did. The LOA specifically required IPDC to use its
> own ASN to announce the space (AS134190).
>
> IPDC subsequently authorized one of its customers to use the said
> prefix.
>
> For reasons still unknown to Cloud Innovation, IPDC and their customer
> set up a BGP session wherein their customer used AS37353 as the
> origin to advertise prefix 156.241.3.0/24.
>
> Upon discovering the announcement, rather than contact Cloud
> Innovation, Mark contacted IPDC who provided him with an incomplete
> explanation blaming their customer and Mark, not realizing that Cloud
> Innovation was not the customer in question posted far and wide about
> the event. It is unclear to us why he chose to do this rather than contact
> us to try and resolve the issue.
>
> A contributing factor to the erroneous BGP configuration by IPDC's customer
> may have been data contained in some outdated IRR route objects
> for 156.241.0.0/16 which have subsequently been deleted.
>
> As soon as we became aware of the problem (via Mark’s email), we began to
> investigate the situation. As soon as it was clear that this was the result of
> third-party actions, we reached out to Mark privately to let him know what we
> knew and that we were still investigating. We delayed making a public
> statement in order to try and ascertain all of the facts of the situation. We
> prefer not to make public statements based on incomplete information.
>
> We apologize to the community for our small part in this unfortunate incident
> and assure you that we work very hard to remain good netizens and will
> address any concerns promptly when they come to our attention.
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Lu Heng
> CEO
> Cloud Innovations
>
> Attached:
> 1. Letter from Paul Wollner
> 2. Letter from Link Infinity
> 3. LOA Issued to IPDC Solutions for announcing 156.241.3.0/24 from AS134190
> 4. Letter from IPDC
>
> FYI: LARUS is proving IP management service for Cloud Innovation, while LARUS is
> also providing IP management service to other third parties in all regions, for full
> disclosure, LARUS and Cloud Innovation are headed by same CEO.
>
> Content of those letters have been posted here for your convince:
>
> IPDC:
>
> FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE [Perusal of Cloud Innovation Ltd]
>
> IPDC Solutions Pte Ltd (IPDC) is a customer of Cloud Innovation Ltd and over the course of our corporate
> relationship we were given the authority to use address block 156.241.3.0/24 since 9th December 2019.
>
> On 12th December 2019, we have delegated that address block to our client. Following which our client
> further instructed us to announce the prefix with AS37353. In good will after minimal verification through
> WHOIS’ IP Prefix we have proceeded to execute our client’s request.
>
> On 7th May 2020 IPDC was then contacted by SEACOM, the legitimate holder of record for that ASN and
> have since learned that the customer’s use of that ASN was erroneous and not permitted by SEACOM and
> immediate action has been taken to rectify this situation.
>
> IPDC would like to apologize for our lack of attention in conducting thorough verification and wish to
> highlight that the involvement of Cloud Innovation Ltd in the entire process was providing the addresses to
> us and that we truly apologize as we understand that this incident may have indirectly implicated Cloud
> Innovation Ltd.
>
> IPDC however, does not wish to disclose our client information and our client information shall remain
> confidential under present circumstances. Once again, we apologize for our shortcomings.
>
> Link Infinity:
>
> To whom it may concern,
>
> We at HK Infinity International Ltd are a customer of Cloud Innovation and in the course received rights to
> use 156.241.3.0/24 from them. Beginning December, 2019, we delegated the right to announce this prefix to
> IPDC Solutions Pte Ltd. (IPDC). We asked Cloud Innovation to provide an LOA authorizing them to
> announce the space which was subsequently received. IPDC subsequently and without our knowledge
> delegated this space to one of their customers and allowed them to originate it from AS37353.
>
> This announcement was not authorized by us, nor is it permitted by the LOA provided by Cloud Innovation.
>
> Unfortunately, we were not aware of the situation until after it had already been resolved.
>
> It was never our intent to violate the LOA or to allow the prefix to be announced from a hijacked ASN. We
> do not condone this and apologize sincerely to the community for what has happened here.
>
> Sincere Apologies,
>
> Paul Wollner:
>
> 8 May 2020
>
> TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN
>
> In the light of the recent email on NAPAfrica mailing list, I would just like to clear the air.
>
> The IP route objects were created by myself for Cloud Innovation when they signed up as a client of
> Macrolan ( now SEACOM) as they didn't have their own AS.
>
> At the time I was working for Macrolan (now SEACOM). I left the employment of SEACOM in October
> 2019.
>
> It appears that when Cloud Innovation's contract with SEACOM came to an end, the route objects were
> never cleaned up.
>
> This occurred after I left SEACOM's employment. Since leaving, I have no access to these objects.
>
> Regards
>
> Paul Wollner
> 082-786-9776
> To whom it may concern,
>
> On May 8, Mark Think posted a claim to multiple lists that Cloud Innovation was
> abusing an ASN (37353) that didn’t belong to them (Cloud Innovation) but rather
> belonged to Seacom through their acquisition of MacroLAN.
>
> While we regret this unfortunate incident, Mark’s claims that it was criminal or bad
> netizenship on the part of Cloud Innovation is without foundation and utterly incorrect.
>
> As shown below in the attached document from Paul Wollner(Ex-CTO of
> Macrolan who created IRR routes to allow Macrolan to announce Cloud
> Innovation's prefix); letter from Link Infinity International Ltd. (Link Infinity), A
> customer of Cloud Innovation; and attached LOA from LARUS authorizing
> IPDC Solutions to announce the prefix with origin AS134190. And a Letter
> from IPDC. This was an innocent mistake committed by third parties and had
> nothing to do with any action by Cloud Innovation or LARUS.
>
> Here’s what happened:
>
> Cloud Innovation delegated a /24 to Link Infinity, an ISP in December
> 2019.
>
> Link Infinity further delegated that same /24 to IPDC and asked Cloud innovation
> to issue an LOA, which we did. The LOA specifically required IPDC to use its
> own ASN to announce the space (AS134190).
>
> IPDC subsequently authorized one of its customers to use the said
> prefix.
>
> For reasons still unknown to Cloud Innovation, IPDC and their customer
> set up a BGP session wherein their customer used AS37353 as the
> origin to advertise prefix 156.241.3.0/24.
>
> Upon discovering the announcement, rather than contact Cloud
> Innovation, Mark contacted IPDC who provided him with an incomplete
> explanation blaming their customer and Mark, not realizing that Cloud
> Innovation was not the customer in question posted far and wide about
> the event. It is unclear to us why he chose to do this rather than contact
> us to try and resolve the issue.
>
> A contributing factor to the erroneous BGP configuration by IPDC's customer
> may have been data contained in some outdated IRR route objects
> for 156.241.0.0/16 which have subsequently been deleted.
>
> As soon as we became aware of the problem (via Mark’s email), we began to
> investigate the situation. As soon as it was clear that this was the result of
> third-party actions, we reached out to Mark privately to let him know what we
> knew and that we were still investigating. We delayed making a public
> statement in order to try and ascertain all of the facts of the situation. We
> prefer not to make public statements based on incomplete information.
>
> We apologize to the community for our small part in this unfortunate incident
> and assure you that we work very hard to remain good netizens and will
> address any concerns promptly when they come to our attention.
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Lu Heng
> CEO
> Cloud Innovations
>
> Attached:
> 1. Letter from Paul Wollner
> 2. Letter from Link Infinity
> 3. LOA Issued to IPDC Solutions for announcing 156.241.3.0/24 from AS134190
> 4. Letter from IPDC
>
> FYI: LARUS is proving IP management service for Cloud Innovation, while LARUS is
> also providing IP management service to other third parties in all regions, for full
> disclosure, LARUS and Cloud Innovation are headed by same CEO.
>
> Content of those letters have been posted here for your convince:
>
> IPDC:
>
> FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE [Perusal of Cloud Innovation Ltd]
>
> IPDC Solutions Pte Ltd (IPDC) is a customer of Cloud Innovation Ltd and over the course of our corporate
> relationship we were given the authority to use address block 156.241.3.0/24 since 9th December 2019.
>
> On 12th December 2019, we have delegated that address block to our client. Following which our client
> further instructed us to announce the prefix with AS37353. In good will after minimal verification through
> WHOIS’ IP Prefix we have proceeded to execute our client’s request.
>
> On 7th May 2020 IPDC was then contacted by SEACOM, the legitimate holder of record for that ASN and
> have since learned that the customer’s use of that ASN was erroneous and not permitted by SEACOM and
> immediate action has been taken to rectify this situation.
>
> IPDC would like to apologize for our lack of attention in conducting thorough verification and wish to
> highlight that the involvement of Cloud Innovation Ltd in the entire process was providing the addresses to
> us and that we truly apologize as we understand that this incident may have indirectly implicated Cloud
> Innovation Ltd.
>
> IPDC however, does not wish to disclose our client information and our client information shall remain
> confidential under present circumstances. Once again, we apologize for our shortcomings.
>
> Link Infinity:
>
> To whom it may concern,
>
> We at HK Infinity International Ltd are a customer of Cloud Innovation and in the course received rights to
> use 156.241.3.0/24 from them. Beginning December, 2019, we delegated the right to announce this prefix to
> IPDC Solutions Pte Ltd. (IPDC). We asked Cloud Innovation to provide an LOA authorizing them to
> announce the space which was subsequently received. IPDC subsequently and without our knowledge
> delegated this space to one of their customers and allowed them to originate it from AS37353.
>
> This announcement was not authorized by us, nor is it permitted by the LOA provided by Cloud Innovation.
>
> Unfortunately, we were not aware of the situation until after it had already been resolved.
>
> It was never our intent to violate the LOA or to allow the prefix to be announced from a hijacked ASN. We
> do not condone this and apologize sincerely to the community for what has happened here.
>
> Sincere Apologies,
>
> Paul Wollner:
>
> 8 May 2020
>
> TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN
>
> In the light of the recent email on NAPAfrica mailing list, I would just like to clear the air.
>
> The IP route objects were created by myself for Cloud Innovation when they signed up as a client of
> Macrolan ( now SEACOM) as they didn't have their own AS.
>
> At the time I was working for Macrolan (now SEACOM). I left the employment of SEACOM in October
> 2019.
>
> It appears that when Cloud Innovation's contract with SEACOM came to an end, the route objects were
> never cleaned up.
>
> This occurred after I left SEACOM's employment. Since leaving, I have no access to these objects.
>
> Regards
>
> Paul Wollner
> 082-786-9776
>
> On Fri, 8 May 2020 at 22:08, Mark Tinka <mark.tinka at seacom.mu> wrote:
> Hi all.
>
> I'm not one to b**ch & moan in public, but per subject, I could not let this one
> slide.
>
> And if you get this from multiple mailing lists, apologies for that - I'm just trying
> to make sure that this reaches as wide an audience as possible, on the
> continent.
>
> SEACOM (AS37100) acquired MacroLan (AS37353) a couple of years ago.
> MacroLan is now part of the SEACOM family, and while we are in the process of
> integrating that network into AS37100, some existing services continue to be
> delivered on AS37353 until that exercise is completed.
>
> One of the customers that AS37353 was providing services to was Cloud
> Innovation, in Cape Town. From a routing perspective, because Cloud
> Innovation had no AS number for this service, all of their IP address space was
> being originated by AS37353, on their behalf.
>
> In December of 2019, AS37353 ceased providing services to Cloud Innovation.
> That is 6 months ago.
>
> In recent days, it came to SEACOM's attention that some of Cloud Innovation's
> IP address space was being originated by AS37353 - specifically,
> 156.241.3.0/24 - even though we were sure that they were no longer a
> customer of AS37353 since December of 2019. At first, we thought this was a
> cached entry in a number of popular looking glasses, but then every looking
> glass had the same entry, which made this an unlikely bug.
>
> As of yesterday afternoon, see below what Telia's looking glass was saying
> about this prefix:
>
> *****
>
> Path #1: Received by speaker 0
> 4809 134190 37353
> 2.255.249.42 (metric 2134) from 2.255.253.101 (80.91.242.40)
> Origin incomplete, localpref 200, valid, internal, best, group-best, import-candidate
> Communities:
>
> 1299:431
> (RPKI state Unknown)
>
> 1299:1000 1299:30000 1299:30600 23456:20413 45352:4500 45352:9204
>
> *****
>
> But when I run a traceroute from my house to that prefix, it clearly was not
> ending up in Cape Town, where AS37353's main operation resides:
>
> *****
>
> MacBook-Pro-7:~ tinka$ traceroute -I 156.241.3.1
> traceroute to 156.241.3.1 (156.241.3.1), 64 hops max, 72 byte packets
> 1 172.16.0.254 (172.16.0.254) 14.824 ms 11.522 ms 3.525 ms
> 2 xe-1-3-0-1064.er-01-jnb.za.seacomnet.com (105.22.37.13) 5.620 ms 9.714 ms 9.887
> ms
> 3 ce-0-2-0-0.cr-02-jnb.za.seacomnet.com (105.16.28.2) 175.232 ms 172.699 ms
> 175.896 ms
> 4 xe-0-0-0-8.cr-02-cpt.za.seacomnet.com (105.16.9.182) 164.496 ms 163.578 ms
> 163.546 ms
> 5 105.16.14.153 (105.16.14.153) 169.812 ms 171.272 ms 177.115 ms
> 6 xe-0-0-0-0.br-02-lhr.uk.seacomnet.com (105.16.34.253) 168.911 ms 172.958 ms
> 165.165 ms
> 7 82.112.115.169 (82.112.115.169) 172.700 ms 176.482 ms 174.375 ms
> 8 ae-17.r05.londen12.uk.bb.gin.ntt.net (129.250.2.147) 672.099 ms 613.617 ms
> 615.109 ms
> 9 ae-2.r24.londen12.uk.bb.gin.ntt.net (129.250.4.244) 181.952 ms 183.087 ms 187.302
> ms
> 10 ae-16.r20.frnkge13.de.bb.gin.ntt.net (129.250.3.13) 190.511 ms 185.579 ms
> 187.058 ms
> 11 ae-3.r20.sngpsi07.sg.bb.gin.ntt.net (129.250.4.17) 520.882 ms 613.982 ms
> 615.275 ms
> 12 ae-9.r24.tkokhk01.hk.bb.gin.ntt.net (129.250.7.67) 612.301 ms 586.886 ms
> 436.711 ms
> 13 ae-1.r03.tkokhk01.hk.bb.gin.ntt.net (129.250.6.98) 614.470 ms 613.416 ms
> 614.281 ms
> 14 ce-0-3-0-3.r03.tkokhk01.hk.ce.gin.ntt.net (203.131.241.126) 614.128 ms 613.661
> ms 615.416 ms
> 15 * * *
> 16 * * *
> 17 156.241.3.1 (156.241.3.1) 494.400 ms 410.180 ms *
> MacBook-Pro-7:~ tinka$
>
> *****
>
> So we, then, realized that this was a fraudulent use of MacroLan's AS37353, to
> which we had given no express permission.
>
> As luck would have it, due to my days living and working in Malaysia, I know
> the good folk that operate AS134190 (IPDC Solutions), who was the upstream
> providing transit for this prefix. So I rang them up yesterday afternoon, told
> them what was happening, and within the hour, they got that eBGP session
> shutdown. I am most grateful to them for their quick response and immediate
> understanding of what was going on. Even with all the technology we have
> today, it, many times, comes down to having good friends in good places.
>
> Anyway, it turns out the ISP that had acquired this prefix from Cloud Innovation
> is based in Manila, Philippines. When IPDC delivered their transit service to
> them in Manila, that ISP informed them that they should use AS37353 for the
> eBGP session. Yes, one could argue that IPDC should have done their checks to
> ensure that the AS number being provided by their customer belongs to them,
> but to be honest, I'm not too bothered about that compared to Cloud
> Innovation's thinking that it was okay to use another network's AS number in
> order to deliver their services to their customers.
>
> IPDC confirm that this service was activated for the Manila ISP in December of
> 2019, right around the time Cloud Innovation's service with SEACOM, in Cape
> Town, ended.
>
> As it currently stands, the ISP in Manila is now off the Internet, with some 12
> paying customers currently without service. Their excuse - they do not have an
> AS number of their own.
>
> IPDC tried to find out why the ISP in Manila thought that it was okay to use
> another network's AS number for their service, and as it turns out, the network
> engineer at the Manila ISP that set this up has since left the company. All the
> ones currently there do not have any history about all of this.
>
> Currently, 156.241.3.0/24 is not in the global BGP table:
>
> *****
>
> lg-01-ams.nl>sh ip bgp 156.241.3.0/24
> % Network not in table
> lg-01-ams.nl>
>
> lg-01-nbo.ke>sh ip bgp 156.241.3.0/24
> % Network not in table
> lg-01-nbo.ke>
>
> lg-01-cpt.za>sh ip bgp 156.241.3.0/24
> % Network not in table
> lg-01-cpt.za>
>
> *****
>
> That Cloud Innovation thought it was okay for them to use MacroLan's AS
> number to originate their own prefixes into the global BGP is as morally
> reprehensible as it is technologically distasteful.
>
> SEACOM have been working very closely with AFRINIC to delete previous route
> objects from their IRR that certify a relationship between Cloud Innovation's
> parent /16 aggregates that cover this prefix, and AS37353, but this is one of
> those objects that cannot be removed via the MyAFRINIC portal, and requires
> manual intervention from AFRINIC.
>
> I have not, personally, spoken to the proprietors of Cloud Innovation and/or
> Outside Heaven, as I don't see how anything could explain this with any degree
> of justification.
>
> For now, I will find some beer to wipe the foul taste from my mouth, while we
> (SEACOM) consider what to do about this.
>
> And yes, for those who are wondering, RPKI's ROV would not have prevented
> this, in its current form. This is AS hijacking, and ROV, today, tries to solve the
> prefix-hijacking problem, first.
>
> Thank you for your attention.
>
> Mark.
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
> --
> --
> Kind regards.
> Lu
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
>
> --
> James Chirwa
> Acting Manager, Member Services Department
> AFRINIC Ltd.
> t: +230 403 51 00 | f: +230 466 6758 |
> tt: @afrinic | w: www.afrinic.net
> SM: facebook.com/afrinic | flickr.com/afrinic | youtube.com/afrinicmedia
> ____________________________
>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
Virus-free. www.avg.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20200527/f5a0ab4f/attachment.html>
More information about the Community-Discuss
mailing list