So that’s the change I saw visible in the RIPE stat files at https://ftp.ripe.net/pub/stats/ripencc/.
Twitter has been announcing that space for years. I wonder if they’ll report what led them to start the announcements. —Sandy > On Jul 13, 2018, at 10:48 AM, Henriette Van Ingen via db-wg <[email protected]> > wrote: > > 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 <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> >> To: Geoff Huston <[email protected]> >> Cc: RIPE Database Working Group <[email protected]> >> 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) >> >> :) >> >> >> - 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 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
