[191389] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: "Defensive" BGP hijacking?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu)
Mon Sep 12 14:17:48 2016
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
To: Jean-Francois Mezei <jfmezei_nanog@vaxination.ca>
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
In-Reply-To: <57D6EEF3.90106@vaxination.ca>
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2016 14:15:26 -0400
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
--==_Exmh_1473704126_2061P
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 14:07:47 -0400, Jean-Francois Mezei said:
> So there are some cases where BGP hijacking may be desirable. I guess
> this is where judgement kicks in.
I don't see "hijacking" in your description of the iStop case - it appears
to have been fully coordinated and with permission.
--==_Exmh_1473704126_2061P
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001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=tgaO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--==_Exmh_1473704126_2061P--
