[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
"Defensive" BGP hijacking?
- Subject: "Defensive" BGP hijacking?
- From: hugo at slabnet.com (Hugo Slabbert)
- Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 13:36:19 -0700
- In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
- References: <[email protected]>
On Tue 2016-Sep-13 13:32:56 -0700, Scott Weeks <surfer at mauigateway.com> wrote:
>
>
>--- bryant at backconnect.com wrote:
>From: Bryant Townsend <bryant at backconnect.com>
>
>@ca & Matt - No, we do not plan to ever intentionally perform a
>non-authorized BGP hijack in the future.
>--------------------------------------------
>
>
>Bryant,
>
>Who was the upstream provider?
3223 / VOXILITY
https://bgpstream.com/event/54711
>scott
--
Hugo Slabbert | email, xmpp/jabber: hugo at slabnet.com
pgp key: B178313E | also on Signal
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20160913/51f7f2ff/attachment.pgp>