5 Jun
2012
5 Jun
'12
8:10 p.m.
are these hams who don't agree with one person controlling 16million addresses,
comercial entities who have been able to hijack them even though it is
"controlled" by ampr? if they were hijacked under the current system does it
really make a difference whether the AS is "ampr" or not. it really does not
look like ampr has done a great job of controlling the space if these are not hams.
Lin
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 5, 2012, at 9:00 PM, Tim Pozar <pozar(a)lns.com> wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
_______________________________________________
On Jun 5, 2012, at 10:40 AM, Tim Pozar wrote:
On Jun 4, 2012, at 4:58 PM, Ralph wrote:
BTW… Folks can see the current announced prefixes at Route Views…
route-views>show ip bgp 44.0.0.0/8 subnets | inc 44.
* 44.0.0.0 194.85.102.33 0 3277 3267 50139 20965 11537
2153 2152 7377 i
* 44.16.15.0/24 194.85.102.33 0 3277 3267 50139 20965 11537
2153 2152 567 226 * 44.68.52.0/24 194.85.102.33 0 3277 3267
174 12637 i
* 44.130.99.0/24 194.85.102.33 0 3277 3267 13237 28748 i
route-views>
AS7377 is UCSD
AS226 is Los Nettos
AS12637 is Seeweb s.r.l.
AS28748 is Marc Pauls (AlphaCron Datensysteme)
Tim
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net Who is hijacking it?
Or are you talking about if ICANN gets the addresses back because we aren't
using them?
My understanding is that in the past some prefixes I have seen announced from the 44/8
have not been authorized by Brian. I am calling those "hi-jacked".