December 2005 - Test - lists.nanog.org

RE: Ethernet over SDH tutorial/concepts.
by Michael K. Smith 06 Dec '05

06 Dec '05

Hello: It could also just be a direct Ethernet path over a SONET circuit without the inherent 802.17 resiliency. You should ask them for more information about their infrastructure. Are they using 802.17? Is it path-protected on the SONET side? Mike -----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On Behalf Of Paul Khavkine Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2005 12:05 PM To: MARLON BORBA Cc: nanog(a)merit.edu Subject: Re: Ethernet over SDH tutorial/concepts. This is most likely something like RPR/802.17 which is Ethernet over Sonet/SDH. Cheers Paul On Wed, 30 Nov 2005, MARLON BORBA wrote: > >Dear NANOGers, > >We are in process of choosing a new corporate ISP for our company. One of them offered us connection to their backbone using Ethernet over SDH. I'd like to find some introductory texts or prospects about that technology and some advice about its pros/cons when compared to traditional data circuits. > > > >Abraços, >Marlon Borba, CISSP. >-- >GTER 20/GTS 02.05 - Participe! >http://eng.registro.br/gter20/prog.html >-- > > ************************************************ Paul Khavkine Networks/Systems Planning and Engineering DISTRIBUTEL Communications. 740 Notre Dame West, Suite 1135 Montreal, Quebec, Canada, H3C 3X6 +1-514-877-5505 x 263 http://www.distributel.net ************************************************

2 1

Re: Clueless anti-virus products/vendors (was Re: Sober)
by W.D.McKinney 05 Dec '05

05 Dec '05

>-----Original Message----- >From: Daniel Senie [mailto:dts@senie.com] >Sent: Friday, December 2, 2005 11:27 AM >To: nanog(a)nanog.org >Subject: Clueless anti-virus products/vendors (was Re: Sober) > > >At 03:12 PM 12/2/2005, Michael Loftis wrote: > > > >>--On December 2, 2005 2:02:15 PM -0600 Dennis Dayman >><dennis(a)thenose.net> wrote: >> >>> >>>Interested, but I see many Sober postings and outages on other lists and >>>not here...has anyone been having issues? I know the ISP's are fighting >>>the living out of the virus. >> >>I've been seeing a few really large bursts into our mailserver. Not >>sure if it's a new variant or a reoccurrence of an old strain. I >>put in a good number of new port 25 inbound blocks for infected >>systems and attempted to put up a few checks inside of our front end >>mail servers rather than in the virus and spam filtering (which >>happens later for us, so for bad surges we put a few custom rules up >>front early in postfix). > >Only stuff we're seeing is a lot of blowback from dumb mail systems >that accept email, THEN scan for viruses, and ultimately decide to >send a note back to the From: address in the body of the infected >email. Since the From: is invariably forged, the uninvolved owner of >those forged email addresses gets hammered. > >Can people building virus scanning devices PLEASE GET A %^&*^ CLUE? >This means you, Barricuda Networks, more than anyone else, but we >also see this annoyance from Symantec devices, and from some AOL >systems as well. > It's a simple switch in the GUI of Barracuda Networks to turn of this annoyance. More operator error than Barracuda's fault, IMHO. -Dee >Blasting a note back does two things: > >1. It allows the worm or virus author an opportunity to implement an >amplified attack on a third party using your filtering systems. > >2. The bounce messages mostly include an advertisement for the >filtering box's vendor. Get a clue... this is a REALLY negative >advertisement for your spam & virus filtering technology. If you >can't manage to realize the virus laden email should perhaps be >dropped, then it makes your box look poorly designed. > >Oh, and please delete the infected file rather than sending that along too. > >OK, off my soapbox. > >Dan > >

6 9

RE: Clueless anti-virus products/vendors (was Re: Sober)
by Daniel Senie 05 Dec '05

05 Dec '05

At 10:27 PM 12/4/2005, Church, Chuck wrote: >What about all the viruses out there that don't forge addresses? As others have noted, these are so far lost in the noise as to not be a factor. >Sending a warning message makes sense for these. Why? Because you need to be the one to tell the sender they are infected? Let sites patrol their own users. Furthermore, if you did your virus scanning during the SMTP transaction, you'd be able to send back a 5xx error response during the transaction, thereby avoiding any concern about spamming an innocent third party. > Unless someone has >done the research to determine the majority of viruses forge addresses, >you really can't complain about the fact that the default is to warn. As others have noted, the vendors can and should know. >Calling vendors 'clueless' because a default doesn't match your needs Excuse me, I think you may notice that a LOT of folks have piped up on this issue. The simple fact is as configured many vendors spam third parties adding to the noise floor. While backbone operators might in fact make a bit extra as a result, those of us who actually pay for bandwidth do not appreciate it. We certainly can and do blacklist sites that hammer us with bogus bounces, just the same as we'd block any company knowingly sending us undesired email. > is >a little extreme, don't you think? The ideal solution would be for the >scanning software to send a warning only if the virus detected is known >to use real addresses, otherwise it won't warn. See question above, re: why do you think it's your systems' place to police the rest of the Internet, sending warnings out? Either reject virus-laden email during the SMTP session, or quietly own it (and dispose of it). >Chuck > > >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On Behalf Of >Todd Vierling >Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2005 4:53 PM >To: W.D.McKinney >Cc: nanog(a)merit.edu >Subject: RE: Clueless anti-virus products/vendors (was Re: Sober) > > >On Sun, 4 Dec 2005, W.D.McKinney wrote: > > > > (Virus "warnings" to forged addresses are UBE, plain and simple.) > > > > Since when? I disagree. > >UBE = "unsolicited bulk e-mail". > >Which of those three words do[es] not apply to virus "warning" >backscatter >to forged envelope/From: addresses? Think carefully before answering. > >-- >-- Todd Vierling <tv(a)duh.org> <tv(a)pobox.com> <todd(a)vierling.name>

1 0

Re: Clueless anti-virus products/vendors (was Re: Sober)
by Robert Bonomi 05 Dec '05

05 Dec '05

> From owner-nanog(a)merit.edu Sun Dec 4 22:34:54 2005 > Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2005 04:30:26 +0000 (GMT) > From: "Christopher L. Morrow" <christopher.morrow(a)mci.com> > Subject: Re: Clueless anti-virus products/vendors (was Re: Sober) > To: "Steven M. Bellovin" <smb(a)cs.columbia.edu> > Cc: "Church, Chuck" <cchurch(a)netcogov.com>, nanog(a)merit.edu > > > On Sun, 4 Dec 2005, Steven M. Bellovin wrote: > > > In message <B6621ED4D0AD394BBA73CA657DFD8976869630(a)MSPEXBE01.wamnet.inc>, "Chur > > ch, Chuck" writes: > > > > > >What about all the viruses out there that don't forge addresses? > > >Sending a warning message makes sense for these. Unless someone has > > > > A-V companies are in the business of analyzing viruses. They should > > *know* how a particular virus behaves. > > This has also been said before, but... they are also in the business of > SELLING their product. It seems that the 'default' (note I don't either: > use av, nor scan emails for virii so I'm not sure what defaults to what... > just use something other than outlook and you can care less about it) is > possibly there for advertising effect more than anything else :( > > Hey, bob's company stopped this virus with $PRODUCT_12, why aren't we > using that product $VP_O_IT ?? "Because they 'very thoughtfully' fowarded the entire message, INCLUDING THE VIRUS ITSELF, to us. _Even_though_ the original message did not originate here. "Do you _really_ think we should start forwarding viruses to our customers, 'just because' their address was forged into a message sent us? Just how do you think our customers would respond to _that_?" There _is_ an art-form to backing management into an untennable corner, when they are bound and determined to do something 'wrong'. It's simply a matter of finding the "right" consequences of the action, to illustrate _why_ the proposed thing is 'wrong'. 'Revenues', and 'customer satisfaction' are almost _universal_ "hot buttons" that can frequently be used to advantage.

1 0

Re: Clueless anti-virus products/vendors (was Re: Sober)
by Robert Bonomi 04 Dec '05

04 Dec '05

> From owner-nanog(a)merit.edu Sun Dec 4 17:19:43 2005 > Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2005 15:18:29 -0800 > From: Steve Sobol <sjsobol(a)JustThe.net> > To: Rich Kulawiec <rsk(a)gsp.org> > Cc: nanog(a)nanog.org > Subject: Re: Clueless anti-virus products/vendors (was Re: Sober) > > > Rich Kulawiec wrote: > > > And thus we now have blacklist entries such as: > > > > barracuda1.aus.texas.net > > barracuda.yale-wrexham.ac.uk > > barracuda.morro-bay.ca.us > > barracuda.ci.mtnview.ca.us > > barracuda.elbert.k12.ga.us > > barracuda.fort-dodge.k12.ia.us > > barracuda.ci.garner.nc.us > > barracuda.ship.k12.pa.us > > > > and many, many more. > > Blocking based on rDNS simply because it implies that a certain piece of > equipment is at that address is... not advisable. _UNTIL_ the first backscatter arrives from 'that' equipment, that is. *wry*grin*

1 0

Re: [NANOG] blocking unallocated subnets
by Randy Bush 03 Dec '05

03 Dec '05

> On recent FreeBSD (ipfw2) <doh> cool. i had never followed the changes in ipfw2. thanks! randy

1 0

Need mail admin contact for prodigy.net,sbcglobal,swbell,flash.net,snet.net,pacbell.net
by Mark Jeftovic 03 Dec '05

03 Dec '05

Our mail forwarding customers to those destinations are having their mail hard bounced right now and we received no response from the removeme(a)sbc.sbcglobal.net address. Any mail admins for those destinations please contact me off list? Thanks -mark -- Mark Jeftovic <markjr(a)easydns.com> Founder and CEO, easyDNS Technologies Inc. ph. +1-(416)-535-8672 ext 225 fx. +1-(866) 273-2892

1 0

Sober
by Dennis Dayman 03 Dec '05

03 Dec '05

Interested, but I see many Sober postings and outages on other lists and not here...has anyone been having issues? I know the ISP's are fighting the living out of the virus. -Dennis

11 11

blocking unallocated subnets
by John S. Bucy 02 Dec '05

02 Dec '05

I work for a large email provider and we've run into trouble delivering mail to certain sites after bringing up new servers in a recently allocated subnet of 72/8. Apparently, some folks decided it would be a good policy to protect their nameservers from ddos attacks to silently drop requests from unallocated subnets. So they obtained a list of subnets at some point in the past, deployed it and then never updated it. This manifests itsself in our system when the dns query repeatedly times out on the smtp servers in that subnet while it works from elsewhere. In the instances we've run into this, it only seemed to affect dns and not, say, smtp connections. I just wanted to try to raise some awareness of this practice and the trouble it may cause if the ruleset gets out-of-date. This caused us a pretty major headache the result of which is that we've given up for now on trying to deliver mail out of that subnet. john

5 5

Weekly Routing Table Report
by Routing Table Analysis 02 Dec '05

02 Dec '05

This is an automated weekly mailing describing the state of the Internet Routing Table as seen from APNIC's router in Japan. Daily listings are sent to bgp-stats(a)lists.apnic.net If you have any comments please contact Philip Smith <pfs(a)cisco.com>. Routing Table Report 04:00 +10GMT Sat 03 Dec, 2005 Analysis Summary ---------------- BGP routing table entries examined: 176067 Prefixes after maximum aggregation: 99087 Unique aggregates announced to Internet: 85328 Total ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 21035 Origin-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 18309 Origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 8674 Transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 2726 Transit-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 72 Average AS path length visible in the Internet Routing Table: 4.5 Max AS path length visible: 23 Prefixes from unregistered ASNs in the Routing Table: 8 Special use prefixes present in the Routing Table: 0 Prefixes being announced from unallocated address space: 13 Number of addresses announced to Internet: 1469673344 Equivalent to 87 /8s, 153 /16s and 111 /24s Percentage of available address space announced: 39.7 Percentage of allocated address space announced: 59.7 Percentage of available address space allocated: 66.4 Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 84502 APNIC Region Analysis Summary ----------------------------- Prefixes being announced by APNIC Region ASes: 36873 Total APNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation: 15699 Prefixes being announced from the APNIC address blocks: 34622 Unique aggregates announced from the APNIC address blocks: 16944 APNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 2419 APNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 699 APNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 364 Average APNIC Region AS path length visible: 4.5 Max APNIC Region AS path length visible: 17 Number of APNIC addresses announced to Internet: 208047808 Equivalent to 12 /8s, 102 /16s and 142 /24s Percentage of available APNIC address space announced: 77.2 APNIC AS Blocks 4608-4864, 7467-7722, 9216-10239, 17408-18431 (pre-ERX allocations) 23552-24575, 37888-38911 APNIC Address Blocks 58/7, 60/7, 124/7, 126/8, 202/7, 210/7, 218/7, 220/7 and 222/8 ARIN Region Analysis Summary ---------------------------- Prefixes being announced by ARIN Region ASes: 92966 Total ARIN prefixes after maximum aggregation: 55975 Prefixes being announced from the ARIN address blocks: 72481 Unique aggregates announced from the ARIN address blocks: 27556 ARIN Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 10379 ARIN Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 3857 ARIN Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 963 Average ARIN Region AS path length visible: 4.3 Max ARIN Region AS path length visible: 17 Number of ARIN addresses announced to Internet: 278432000 Equivalent to 16 /8s, 152 /16s and 137 /24s Percentage of available ARIN address space announced: 69.1 ARIN AS Blocks 1-1876, 1902-2042, 2044-2046, 2048-2106 (pre-ERX allocations) 2138-2584, 2615-2772, 2823-2829, 2880-3153 3354-4607, 4865-5119, 5632-6655, 6912-7466 7723-8191, 10240-12287, 13312-15359, 16384-17407 18432-20479, 21504-23551, 25600-26591, 26624-27647, 29696-30719, 31744-33791 35840-36863 ARIN Address Blocks 24/8, 63/8, 64/6, 68/7, 70/6, 74/7, 76/8, 198/7, 204/6, 208/7 and 216/8 RIPE Region Analysis Summary ---------------------------- Prefixes being announced by RIPE Region ASes: 34421 Total RIPE prefixes after maximum aggregation: 23247 Prefixes being announced from the RIPE address blocks: 31362 Unique aggregates announced from the RIPE address blocks: 21087 RIPE Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 7370 RIPE Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 3865 RIPE Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 1217 Average RIPE Region AS path length visible: 5.1 Max RIPE Region AS path length visible: 20 Number of RIPE addresses announced to Internet: 226078976 Equivalent to 13 /8s, 121 /16s and 177 /24s Percentage of available RIPE address space announced: 67.4 RIPE AS Blocks 1877-1901, 2043, 2047, 2107-2136, 2585-2614 (pre-ERX allocations) 2773-2822, 2830-2879, 3154-3353, 5377-5631 6656-6911, 8192-9215, 12288-13311, 15360-16383 20480-21503, 24576-25599, 28672-29695 30720-31743, 33792-35839, 38912-39935 RIPE Address Blocks 62/8, 80/5, 88/6, 188/8, 193/8, 194/7, 212/7 and 217/8 LACNIC Region Analysis Summary ------------------------------ Prefixes being announced by LACNIC Region ASes: 10032 Total LACNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation: 3316 Prefixes being announced from the LACNIC address blocks: 8323 Unique aggregates announced from the LACNIC address blocks: 4822 LACNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 651 LACNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 208 LACNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 120 Average LACNIC Region AS path length visible: 5.2 Max LACNIC Region AS path length visible: 23 Number of LACNIC addresses announced to Internet: 22953984 Equivalent to 1 /8s, 94 /16s and 64 /24s Percentage of available LACNIC address space announced: 34.2 LACNIC AS Blocks 26592-26623, 27648-28671, plus ERX transfers LACNIC Address Blocks 189/8, 190/8, 200/7 AfriNIC Region Analysis Summary ------------------------------- Prefixes being announced by AfriNIC Region ASes: 1767 Total AfriNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation: 850 Prefixes being announced from the AfriNIC address blocks: 1157 Unique aggregates announced from the AfriNIC address blocks: 834 AfriNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 144 AfriNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 45 AfriNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 21 Average AfriNIC Region AS path length visible: 4.5 Max AfriNIC Region AS path length visible: 12 Number of AfriNIC addresses announced to Internet: 2884608 Equivalent to 0 /8s, 44 /16s and 4 /24s Percentage of available AfriNIC address space announced: 8.6 AfriNIC AS Blocks 36864-37887 & ERX transfers AfriNIC Address Blocks 41/8, 196/8 APNIC Region per AS prefix count summary ---------------------------------------- ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 4134 1014 6356 216 CHINANET-BACKBONE 9583 833 77 12 Sify Limited 4755 759 260 70 Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd. Aut 1221 692 1370 502 Telstra Pty Ltd 4766 653 3927 287 Korea Telecom (KIX) 7545 509 108 70 TPG Internet Pty Ltd 17676 470 6819 100 Softbank BB Corp. 17488 425 25 23 Hathway IP Over Cable Interne 9498 408 216 65 BHARTI BT INTERNET LTD. 9443 394 87 80 Primus Telecommunications 4802 345 73 158 Wantree Development 2907 340 1764 317 SINET Japan 9929 331 217 49 China Netcom Corp. 17557 331 24 161 Pakistan Telecom 18302 329 152 25 SK Global co., Ltd 7474 325 225 224 SingTel Optus Pty Ltd 17974 281 65 16 PT TELEKOMUNIKASI INDONESIA 9837 272 78 174 Powertel Ltd 18101 271 68 19 Reliance Infocom Ltd Internet 9800 255 410 67 CHINA UNICOM ARIN Region per AS prefix count summary --------------------------------------- ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 7018 1471 6314 962 AT&T WorldNet Services 4323 1190 706 233 Time Warner Telecom 174 1074 5846 993 Cogent Communications 721 999 21889 299 DLA Systems Automation Center 701 986 8133 829 UUNET Technologies, Inc. 6197 968 432 502 BellSouth Network Solutions, 2386 914 530 685 AT&T Data Communications Serv 18566 879 240 7 Covad Communications 1239 844 2801 598 Sprint 209 658 3607 521 Qwest 20115 656 533 344 Charter Communications 11492 632 81 10 Cable One 22773 585 1476 28 Cox Communications, Inc. 852 574 1093 382 Telus Advanced Communications 19262 565 1594 137 Verizon Global Networks 19916 563 49 54 OLM LLC 855 562 247 66 Canadian Research Network 3602 532 126 103 Sprint Canada, Inc. 3356 514 10633 401 Level 3 Communications, LLC 6478 502 1432 280 AT&T Worldnet Services RIPE Region per AS prefix count summary --------------------------------------- ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 702 606 1959 479 UUNET - Commercial IP service 3301 306 1085 292 TeliaNet Sweden 3320 285 3230 240 Deutsche Telekom AG 8220 271 475 266 COLT Telecommunications 680 245 2040 239 DFN-IP service G-WiN 8708 236 274 217 Romania Data Systems S.A. 3246 230 477 223 Song Networks 6746 199 51 171 Dynamic Network Technologies, 1257 189 712 170 SWIPnet Swedish IP Network 3269 182 1829 68 TELECOM ITALIA 5515 180 840 127 Sonera Solution Autonomous Sy 786 174 1795 174 The JANET IP Service 5400 166 317 136 BT Ignite European Backbone 8866 163 37 9 Bulgarian Telecommunication C 6830 161 669 33 UPC Distribution Services 3300 158 169 92 AUCS Communications Services 12479 151 322 5 Uni2 Autonomous System 24863 151 37 6 LINKdotNET AS number 3215 150 1275 81 France Telecom Transpac 25186 147 211 103 France Telecom Transpac's Tra LACNIC Region per AS prefix count summary ----------------------------------------- ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 8151 397 709 170 UniNet S.A. de C.V. 16814 295 18 7 NSS, S.A. 11172 289 106 74 Servicios Alestra S.A de C.V 11664 219 22 28 Keytech SA 19632 196 14 5 Metropolis Intercom S.A. 14117 184 11 6 Telefonica del Sur S.A. 22047 179 128 7 VTR PUNTO NET S.A. 13999 174 52 9 Mega Cable S.A. de C.V. 6147 157 118 21 Telefonica Del Peru 7303 152 72 19 Telecom Argentina Stet-France 11556 132 64 3 Cable-Wireless Panama 19169 127 8 20 Telconet 10481 121 48 8 Prima S.A. 6503 114 148 75 AVANTEL, S.A. 18822 114 8 11 TELEFONICA MANQUEHUE 5639 112 12 9 Telecommunications Services o 21826 112 14 18 INTERCABLE 6505 107 88 80 Global One Communicaoes Ltda 11311 99 8 10 Sinectis S.A. 4270 94 17 9 Red de Interconexion Universi AfriNIC Region per AS prefix count summary ------------------------------------------ ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 3741 271 812 229 The Internet Solution 8452 147 44 7 TEDATA 5536 122 8 16 Internet Egypt Network 2018 117 298 103 Tertiary Education Network 2905 74 155 67 The Internetworking Company o 6713 69 71 10 Itissalat Al-MAGHRIB 20928 61 16 2 Noor Advanced Technologies AS 24835 59 34 6 RAYA Telecom - Egypt 15475 57 84 4 Nile Online 5713 38 151 34 Telkom SA Ltd 33774 33 4 24 AS Number for Telecom Algeria 15706 31 8 3 Sudatel Internet Exchange Aut 8524 23 1 4 AUCEGYPT Autonomous System 16637 23 10 21 Johnnic e-Ventures 23889 23 5 9 MAURITIUS TELECOM 10798 22 1 13 Standard Bank of South Africa 21280 21 4 4 Swift Global Kenya Ltd.Is an 12258 17 3 11 Vodacom Internet Company 15808 17 2 2 Communication Solutions Ltd i 21491 17 17 2 UTL On-line is RF broadband I Global Per AS Maximum Aggr summary ---------------------------------- ASN No of nets Net Savings Description 4323 1190 957 Time Warner Telecom 18566 879 872 Covad Communications 9583 833 821 Sify Limited 4134 1014 798 CHINANET-BACKBONE 721 999 700 DLA Systems Automation Center 4755 759 689 Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd. Aut 11492 632 622 Cable One 22773 585 557 Cox Communications, Inc. 19916 563 509 OLM LLC 855 562 496 Canadian Research Network 6197 968 466 BellSouth Network Solutions, 5668 486 460 CenturyTel Internet Holdings, 7545 509 439 TPG Internet Pty Ltd 3602 532 429 Sprint Canada, Inc. 19262 565 428 Verizon Global Networks 17488 425 402 Hathway IP Over Cable Interne 17676 470 370 Softbank BB Corp. 4766 653 366 Korea Telecom (KIX) 6467 411 363 E.Spire Communications, Inc. 9498 408 343 BHARTI BT INTERNET LTD. List of Unregistered ASNs (Global) ---------------------------------- Bad AS Designation Network Transit AS Description 38976 UNALLOCATED 62.192.224.0/19 21166 Satgate autonomous s 38976 UNALLOCATED 62.192.232.0/24 21166 Satgate autonomous s 24413 UNALLOCATED 202.46.32.0/19 17623 China Netcom Corp. 64720 PRIVATE 202.127.124.0/24 4837 chinanet IDC center 64720 PRIVATE 202.127.125.0/24 4837 chinanet IDC center 24406 UNALLOCATED 203.119.26.0/24 4808 CNCGROUP IP network: 24406 UNALLOCATED 203.119.27.0/24 4808 CNCGROUP IP network: 24406 UNALLOCATED 203.119.29.0/24 4808 CNCGROUP IP network: Advertised Unallocated Addresses -------------------------------- Network Origin AS Description 132.0.0.0/10 721 DLA Systems Automation Center 137.0.0.0/13 721 DLA Systems Automation Center 158.0.0.0/13 721 DLA Systems Automation Center 175.98.111.0/24 6453 Teleglobe Inc. 192.43.230.0/24 7575 Australian Academic and Rease 192.44.0.0/24 5501 Fraunhofer Gesellschaft 192.44.0.0/19 702 UUNET - Commercial IP service 192.70.164.0/24 25689 National Research Council of 192.72.0.0/18 4780 Digital United Inc. 192.72.0.0/16 4780 Digital United Inc. 192.84.205.0/24 719 LANLINK autonomous system 192.119.135.0/24 270 NASA 192.172.0.0/19 721 DLA Systems Automation Center Number of prefixes announced per prefix length (Global) ------------------------------------------------------- /1:0 /2:0 /3:0 /4:0 /5:0 /6:0 /7:0 /8:18 /9:5 /10:8 /11:19 /12:84 /13:190 /14:342 /15:668 /16:8609 /17:2906 /18:4893 /19:11062 /20:12227 /21:10256 /22:13524 /23:14646 /24:95662 /25:352 /26:291 /27:205 /28:25 /29:12 /30:30 /31:3 /32:30 Advertised prefixes smaller than registry allocations ----------------------------------------------------- ASN No of nets Total ann. Description 18566 863 879 Covad Communications 6197 783 968 BellSouth Network Solutions, 7018 722 1471 AT&T WorldNet Services 9583 656 833 Sify Limited 2386 640 914 AT&T Data Communications Serv 11492 624 632 Cable One 4323 568 1190 Time Warner Telecom 19916 557 563 OLM LLC 4766 458 653 Korea Telecom (KIX) 855 434 562 Canadian Research Network 7011 402 466 Citizens Utilities 702 386 606 UUNET - Commercial IP service 5668 385 486 CenturyTel Internet Holdings, 1239 365 844 Sprint 6198 356 494 BellSouth Network Solutions, 6517 320 345 Yipes Communications, Inc. 15270 320 347 PaeTec.net -a division of Pae 22773 303 585 Cox Communications, Inc. 13609 298 340 Choice One Communications Inc 18302 298 329 SK Global co., Ltd Number of /24s announced per /8 block (Global) ---------------------------------------------- 4:3 8:40 12:1624 13:1 15:11 16:3 17:3 18:3 20:42 24:711 30:2 32:64 38:187 40:54 44:3 47:3 52:4 55:1 56:3 57:35 58:94 59:103 60:160 61:805 62:801 63:1898 64:2925 65:2138 66:2903 67:643 68:686 69:1332 70:241 71:36 72:474 80:692 81:586 82:487 83:321 84:334 85:381 86:217 87:109 125:130 128:151 129:169 130:99 131:304 132:35 133:1 134:151 135:45 136:167 137:66 138:176 139:75 140:448 141:145 142:404 143:143 144:219 145:34 146:304 147:131 148:271 149:186 150:108 151:71 152:111 153:94 154:5 155:153 156:88 157:118 158:147 159:175 160:84 161:74 162:241 163:173 164:184 165:180 166:147 167:242 168:461 169:143 170:313 171:12 175:1 192:5740 193:3375 194:2432 195:1637 196:712 198:3914 199:3250 200:4313 201:467 202:6285 203:6602 204:3834 205:2092 206:2432 207:2928 208:2028 209:3446 210:1777 211:799 212:1223 213:1382 214:314 215:42 216:3774 217:1178 218:220 219:131 220:538 221:325 222:130 End of report

1 0