From Address Forged

On 5 Nov 98, at 20:41, Michael van Elst wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 05, 1998 at 06:01:23PM +0100, Siegfried Langenbach wrote:
> > On 5 Nov 98, at 17:45, Daniel Karrenberg wrote:
> > 
> > > 
> > > Wilhelm and other colleagues,
> > > 
> > > it appears that the header forging did only occur in an effort to
> > > correct mistakes made earlier.  Repeat: the updates that caused the
> > > problems originally were not done using forged headers.  This does not
> > > mean header forging was not very bad judgement, but at least it occurred
> > > only in an effort to correct earlier mistakes.  The RIPE NCC will work
> > > with Transpac on a post-mortem analysis.  More news as it develops. 
> > 
> > Hmm, 
> > if it was needed to forge a header to correct a mistake,
> > how then the mistake could be done without forging the header?
> > 
> > siegfried
> 
> 
> 
> I get tired discussing this.
> 
> 
> Yes, the original 'mistake' didn't involve forged headers.
> Yes, old records have been deleted this way.

Dear Michael,

I dont think that reaction is appropriate. I see a valid need of RIPE NCC 
members to know what was going on. As chair of CORE-SRS-WG I am personally 
envolved in that kind of problems and would like to learn. You may have more 
infos than others, thats fine with you, but please let us share them.
Your listing of "affirmatives" is not really the report I am expecting (as 
promised by Daniel).

siegfried

[...]
> -- 
> i.A. Michael van Elst                /          phone: +49 721 6635 330
> Xlink - Network Information Centre \/           fax:   +49 721 6635 349
> Vincenz-Priessnitz-Str. 3          /\ link      http://nic.xlink.net/
> D-76131 Karlsruhe, Germany        /_______      email: hostmaster at xlink.net
> [ Xlink Internet Consulting GmbH, Sitz Koeln                              ]
> [ Amtsgericht Koeln HRB 3526, Geschaeftsfuehrer: Michael Rotert           ]
> 
>