[db-wg] Source GRS vs RIPE

Dear all,

We would like to inform you that the RIPE NCC has de-registered 188.64.224.0/21 on 10 July 2018 according to our published procedures. We are in contact with the relevant party.

Best Regards,

Henriette van Ingen
Customer Services
RIPE NCC


> On 13 Jul 2018, at 11:54, denis walker via db-wg <db-wg at ripe.net> wrote:
> 
> Hi Guys
> 
> I am sure everyone will disagree with me, but this shows (to me) why it would be better to have one authoritative, accurate, trusted, distributed IRR managed by the 5 RIRs than many independent/commercial IRRs with non authenticated data.
> 
> cheers
> denis
> co-chair DB-WG
> 
> 
> 
> From: Aftab Siddiqui via db-wg <db-wg at ripe.net>
> To: Geoff Huston <gih at apnic.net> 
> Cc: RIPE Database Working Group <db-wg at ripe.net>
> Sent: Thursday, 12 July 2018, 18:40
> Subject: Re: [db-wg] Source GRS vs RIPE
> 
> Hi Geoff,
>  
> Of course Twitter is doing nothing uniquely unusual in this respect, as these are just 7 examples from a pool of some 300 announcements of unallocated address space (a list of such bogons can be found at http://www.cidr-report.org/as2.0/#Bogons <http://www.cidr-report.org/as2.0/#Bogons>)
> 
> :) 
>  
> 
> - Why is Twitter announcing these prefixes? 
> 
>    I have no idea. Something has gone wrong here and the address has come back to the RIR and Twitter apper to be unaware of this.
> 
> No, Twitter is absolutely aware of this issue, I alerted their NOC when I got the result this morning from CIDR report (yes, I scrop your data daily) but unfortunately there response was "This prefix is valid and owned by us in RIPE region. Please do your homework before making incorrect accusations." But atleast I tried.
>  
> - How and why is this prefix in RADB, given that it is unallocated space? 
> 
>    Good question - I wonder what periodic checks the RADB undertakes on the data held in its registry?
> 
> No idea, it should be triggered right away when the RIR, who is the authentic source of these resources marked them "Unalloacted". But in a perfect world.
>  
> - Why do upstream AS’s accept these advertised prefixes? 
> 
>    Maybe they chose to believe that RADB performs robust periodic integrity checks? Or <insert reason here>?
> 
> Yes, mostly follow RADB. 
>  
> 
> Geoff
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/db-wg/attachments/20180713/d533b238/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2618 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/db-wg/attachments/20180713/d533b238/attachment.p7s>