[Community-Discuss] Cloud Innovation Displays Very Poor, If Not Criminal, Netizenship

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Hi Owen,
I won’t respond to your intimidation but focus on the real technical
issues. See my response below inline

Le ven. 29 mai 2020 à 00:59, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> a écrit :


> Arnaud,

>

> You are mistaken on a number of points.

>

>

> On May 28, 2020, at 13:05 , Arnaud AMELINA <amelnaud at gmail.com> wrote:

>

> Hi, all communities

>

> It was said that the hijacking of AS37353 was a configuration mistake,

> coupled with poor oversight in checking the right to use of the ASN by a

> certain IPDC customer.

>

> It was also said that this would have been facilitated by old and stalled

> IRR objects from MacroLAN before the service contract ended in December

> 2019.

>

> It was also stated that the BGP announcement was stopped and some actions

> taken to delete the stalled routing registry object from IRR.

>

>

> Yes… The registry objects created by MacroLAN have been deleted.

>

> Below  are some data which gives some extra information and confirm

> previous claim that this incident was not accidental.

>

>

> Below is some very redacted data which gives virtually no information.

>

> NB: All data are collected from their source, Today, 28 May 2020, at 10:00

> UTC.

>

> IRRs created in March 2020 with AS37353 as Origin for 156.241.3.0/24 by

> HGC

>

>  $ whois -h whois.radb.net '156.241.3.0/24'

>

> route:      156.241.3.0/24 descr:      Proxy-registered route object

> origin:     AS37353 notify:     matthew.chan at hgc.com.hk mnt-by:

>  MAINT-HGC-INTL changed:    matthew.chan at hgc.com.hk 20200304 source:

>  RADB

>

> =====

> route:          156.241.3.0/24

> descr:          Proxy-registered route object origin:         AS37353

> remarks:        This is a HGC customer route-object

> remarks:        which is being exported under this origin AS.

> remarks:

> remarks:        This route object was created because no existing

> remarks:        route object with the same origin was found.

> remarks:

> remarks:        Please contact radb at hutchcity.com if you have any

> remarks:        questions regarding this object.

> notify:         radb at hutchcity.com

> mnt-by:         MAINT-AS9304

> changed:        radb at hutchcity.com 20200304

> source:         NTTCOM

> ====

>

>

> We haven changed anything, but here’s the full text of that whois command:

> ...

> changed:    admin at cloudix.online 20200511  #03:10:36Z

> source:     RADB

> 0.000u 0.001s 0:00.19 0.0%      0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w

> owen (122) ~ %

>                                 2020/05/28 16:58:53

>

> Looks like there’s additional cruft left in some routing registries that

> we still haven’t removed. I’ve asked people to get on that.

>

>

Good.. this is the reason for my mail.
Draw attention on these route objects which should have never existed on
RADB and get them cleaned up by your customer who is the maintainer of the
route object as per the records.



> However, just because it’s in RADB doesn’t mean it’s advertised.

>


The routing visibility I referred to was not because route objects are in
RADB or in NTT routing registries..

Even though the prefix is no longer seen in global routing table, it is
been seen by some route collectors.

One route collector at RIPE Stat sees as shown in the picture as at now.

[ picture]
And the ASPATH speaks for itself.



> Nonetheless, we are actively working to get those errant entries cleaned

> up. Thank you for bringing them to our attention.

>

> Please let the community know when everything is cleaned.

Thank you

--
Arnaud

...


> _______________________________________________

>> Community-Discuss mailing list

>> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net

>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

>>

> _______________________________________________

> Community-Discuss mailing list

> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net

> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

>

>

>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20200529/288a5518/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: IMG_20200529_074734_512.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 62307 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20200529/288a5518/attachment-0001.jpg>