nanog mailing list archives
Re: Potential Prefix Hijack
From: Raymond Dijkxhoorn <raymond () prolocation net>
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 15:12:32 +0100 (CET)
Hi!
That's not true, as not all our prefixes were hijacked nor leaked, since they were originating them. If they were leaking them you might be able to see further AS's on the AS-PATH, incluiding the legitimate AS for originating those prefixes.
We have seen issues like this also when a customer was leaking full routes, and his router ws not able to coop with the BGP tables. This gave really really strange things, simmilar like here, some prefixes were there and some not. Completely random.
Am i seeing things in a blur way ? or this is supposed to happen as wind flows ?
Upstreams should filter things properly. Thats a sure thing. OR max prefix limit customers like that....
Bye, Raymond.
Current thread:
- RE: Potential Prefix Hijack, (continued)
- RE: Potential Prefix Hijack Paul Kelly :: Blacknight (Nov 11)
- Re: Fwd: RE: Potential Prefix Hijack Scott Weeks (Nov 10)
- Re: Fwd: RE: Potential Prefix Hijack Hank Nussbacher (Nov 10)
- RE: Potential Prefix Hijack Kyle Duren (Nov 10)
- Re: Potential Prefix Hijack Nuno Vieira - nfsi telecom (Nov 11)
- Re: Potential Prefix Hijack Raymond Dijkxhoorn (Nov 11)
- Re: Potential Prefix Hijack Patrick W. Gilmore (Nov 11)
- Re: Potential Prefix Hijack Tuc at T-B-O-H.NET (Nov 11)
- Re: Potential Prefix Hijack Raymond Dijkxhoorn (Nov 11)
- Re: Potential Prefix Hijack Nuno Vieira - nfsi telecom (Nov 11)
- Re: Potential Prefix Hijack Raymond Dijkxhoorn (Nov 11)
- Re: Potential Prefix Hijack Raymond Dijkxhoorn (Nov 11)