[149336] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: [#135346] Unauthorized BGP Announcements (follow up to Hijacked
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (George Bonser)
Wed Feb 1 16:01:48 2012
From: George Bonser <gbonser@seven.com>
To: Nathan Eisenberg <nathan@atlasnetworks.us>
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2012 21:00:55 +0000
In-Reply-To: <8C26A4FDAE599041A13EB499117D3C286B694AD0@ex-mb-1.corp.atlasnetworks.us>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org list" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
> So, to pose the obvious question: Should there be?
>=20
> (I honestly don't know the answer is to this question, and am asking in
> earnest for opinions on the subject)
>=20
> Nathan
>=20
>=20
Well, calling the law on someone is kind of the whiner's way out anyway. I=
t would seem that the community could agree on a set of standards for deali=
ng with such problems and if you don't agree to those standards, nobody rou=
tes your traffic. In other words, if network A finds network B announcing =
allocated space belonging to network A and network A makes them (network B)=
and their upstream provider(s) aware and they refuse to stop the announcem=
ent, there should be a mechanism by which the community can agree to filter=
Network B's AS *and* the AS of the upstream(s) until the situation is rec=
tified. That's a pretty big hammer but verifying someone's legitimate clai=
m on address space isn't that hard, in most cases. =20
