nanog mailing list archives
Re: "Defensive" BGP hijacking?
From: Hugo Slabbert <hugo () slabnet com>
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2016 09:51:23 -0700
On Mon 2016-Sep-12 09:31:41 -0700, Scott Weeks <surfer () mauigateway com> wrote:Full disclosure: I had a working relationship with Bryant when he was still at Staminus.
Bryant (if you're on list):I mean no harm by this and never had any trouble working with you. I just believe this is a conversation that needs to be had.
--- blake () ispn net wrote: From: Blake Hudson <blake () ispn net> Scott Weeks wrote on 9/12/2016 11:08 AM:From: NANOG <nanog-bounces () nanog org> on behalf of Blake Hudson <blake () ispn net>My suggestion is that BackConnect/Bryant Townsend should have their ASN revoked for fraudulently announcing another organization's address space. They are not law enforcement, they did not have a warrant or judicial oversight, they were not in immediate mortal peril, etc, etc. ------------------------------------------------- Are the RIRs the internet police?ARIN has policies against fraudulently obtaining resources and has policies for revoking said resources. One could argue that announcing another org's IP resources without authorization is fraud and that said ip resources were fraudulently obtained during the time they were announced by BlackConnect. That said, this ASN was obtained through RIPE (despite the person/company being located in Calfornia, USA) and I did not see any RIPE policies related to fraud. My thought is that if Mr Townsend shows disregard for the stability of the internet by hijacking other's IP space, he should not be allowed to participate. There are comments to the Kreb's article indicating that this was not an isolated incident by Mr Townsend and instead represents one event in a pattern of behavior. ------------------------------------------------- I am somewhat in agreement with Mel: "This thoughtless action requires a response from the community, and an apology from BackConnect. If we can't police ourselves, someone we don't like will do it for us. "But the first part seems to verge on vigilantism.
Operators are free to do whatever they like inside their own networks as long as they don't impact others. Barring RPKI coverage, we're still talking about an element of trust in BGP to believe what AS 203959 tells us. If I no longer believe what 203959 advertises, I don't have to accept anything with aspath .* 203959 .* in it. I don't see routing policy decisions in my own network as vigilantism.
Solutions are hard. BGP filters should be in place. Maybe that's the non-vigilante response. Force filters somehow.However, this has all been discussed over and over here... ;-) scott
-- Hugo Slabbert | email, xmpp/jabber: hugo () slabnet com pgp key: B178313E | also on Signal
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Current thread:
- Re: "Defensive" BGP hijacking?, (continued)
- Re: "Defensive" BGP hijacking? Hugo Slabbert (Sep 12)
- Re: "Defensive" BGP hijacking? Jean-Francois Mezei (Sep 12)
- Re: "Defensive" BGP hijacking? Valdis . Kletnieks (Sep 12)
- Re: "Defensive" BGP hijacking? Jean-Francois Mezei (Sep 12)
- Re: "Defensive" BGP hijacking? Hugo Slabbert (Sep 12)
- Re: "Defensive" BGP hijacking? jim deleskie (Sep 13)
- Re: "Defensive" BGP hijacking? Scott Weeks (Sep 12)
- Re: "Defensive" BGP hijacking? Blake Hudson (Sep 12)
- Re: "Defensive" BGP hijacking? John Curran (Sep 12)
- Re: "Defensive" BGP hijacking? Mel Beckman (Sep 12)
- Re: "Defensive" BGP hijacking? Scott Weeks (Sep 12)
- Re: "Defensive" BGP hijacking? Hugo Slabbert (Sep 12)
- Re: "Defensive" BGP hijacking? Blake Hudson (Sep 12)
- Re: "Defensive" BGP hijacking? Scott Weeks (Sep 12)
- Re: "Defensive" BGP hijacking? Bryant Townsend (Sep 13)
- Re: "Defensive" BGP hijacking? Ca By (Sep 13)
- Re: "Defensive" BGP hijacking? Matt Freitag (Sep 13)
- Re: "Defensive" BGP hijacking? Ryan, Spencer (Sep 13)
- Re: "Defensive" BGP hijacking? Blake Hudson (Sep 13)
- Re: "Defensive" BGP hijacking? Mel Beckman (Sep 13)
- Re: "Defensive" BGP hijacking? Doug Montgomery (Sep 13)
- Re: "Defensive" BGP hijacking? Ca By (Sep 13)
- Re: "Defensive" BGP hijacking? Ca By (Sep 13)