April 2008 - Test - lists.nanog.org

the O(N^2) problem
by Edward B. DREGER 14 Apr '08

14 Apr '08

Bottom line first: We need OOB metadata ("trust/distrust") information exchange that scales better than the current O(N^2) nonsense, yet is not PKI. And now, the details... which ended up longer reading than I intended. My apologies. As Mark Twain said, "I didn't have time to write a short letter, so I wrote a long one instead." :-) When it comes to establishing trust: * The current SMTP model is O(N^2); * I posit that the current IP networking model is sub-O(N); * PKI models are pretty much O(1). Polynomial-order just doesn't scale well. It's mathematical fact, and particularly painful when the independent variable is still increasing quickly. Many operators seem to reject PKI as "power in too few hands". I'll not disagree with that. Conclusion: What we need is something that scales better than O(N^2), but that is not as "few trusted keepers of the world" as PKI. Let's look to one of the current hot tickets: social networking. Who is whose friend, who is in whose network, blah blah blah. (The junior high students seem to grok the concept of trust being semi-transitive!) Let's also draw upon operational lessons from a couple old-timers. I recall using a critter known as "NNTP". And once upon a time, before my days on the Internet, lived a funny little beast called "UUCP". We track email quality from all mailservers that hit us. I can whip up a list of MXes/organizations that I'm willing to "trust" -- and let's leave that term imprecisely-defined for now. Here's what I propose: Establish a "distrust protocol". Let path weight be "distrust". The "trust path" is of secondary importance to "path weight", although not completely irrelevant. SMTP endpoint not in graph? Fine; have some default behavior. Let _trust_ be semi-transitive, a la BGP -- a technology that we know, understand, and at least sort of trust to run this crazy, giant network that dwarfs even a 50M-user provider. Let actual _content_ still be end-to-end, so that we do not simply reincarnate NNTP or UUCP. Alternatively: I'm open to other suggestions. Or, there's plan "C": We continue to argue, banter, carp, fuss, grumble, moan, swear, whine, et cetera (I decided against running the alphabet) over the problem. Hey, it's worked/working great so far, right? Eddy -- Everquick Internet - http://www.everquick.net/ A division of Brotsman & Dreger, Inc. - http://www.brotsman.com/ Bandwidth, consulting, e-commerce, hosting, and network building Phone: +1 785 865 5885 Lawrence and [inter]national Phone: +1 316 794 8922 Wichita ________________________________________________________________________ DO NOT send mail to the following addresses: davidc(a)brics.com -*- jfconmaapaq(a)intc.net -*- sam(a)everquick.net Sending mail to spambait addresses is a great way to get blocked. Ditto for broken OOO autoresponders and foolish AV software backscatter.

8 10

clickbank.net and bundleway.com
by Jon R. Kibler 14 Apr '08

14 Apr '08

Hi, Anyone have any info on either of these domains? I have seen several recent web sites that had an iframe that pointed to clickbank.net and "interesting" / hidden links to bundleway.com. Haven't found much of use in a quick search of Google, except for a few claims of fraud against them. I suspect that they are some how related to affiliate programs? TIA for anything you may be able to tell me! Jon Kibler -- Jon R. Kibler Chief Technical Officer Advanced Systems Engineering Technology, Inc. Charleston, SC USA o: 843-849-8214 m: 843-224-2494 ================================================== Filtered by: TRUSTEM.COM's Email Filtering Service http://www.trustem.com/ No Spam. No Viruses. Just Good Clean Email.

5 4

Speedtest site accuracy [was: Bandwidth issues in the Sprint network]
by Scott Weeks 14 Apr '08

14 Apr '08

--- mevans(a)alphatheory.com wrote: Try using the Java test on DSLReports rather than the Flash based test. I've found it to be much more accurate. I also receive the message about compression being used when I test with the flash test. I think it may be a bug. --------------------------------------- This brings up a PITA point for me. Recently, I have seen a rash of "Speedsite test server at <location> says blah, blah, blah" tickets finally reach me and I am telling everyone they're not an accurate way to measure network performance. I notice that at least some are just sending text in Latin. To other medium-sized eyeball network providers (I'm defining medium size as 50-150K DSL/Cable connections and 50-1500 leased line customers): are you seeing this and what do you tell your customers? scott

10 10

/24 blocking by ISPs - Re: Problems sending mail to yahoo?
by Suresh Ramasubramanian 14 Apr '08

14 Apr '08

On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 1:22 AM, Raymond L. Corbin <rcorbin(a)hostmysite.com> wrote: > > Yeah, but without them saying which IP's are causing the problems you can't really tell > which servers in a datacenter are forwarding their spam/abusing Yahoo. Once the /24 > block is in place then they claim to have no way of knowing who actually caused the block > on the /24. The feedback loop would help depending on your network size. Almost every large ISP does that kind of "complimentary upgrade" There are enough networks around, like he.net, Yipes, PCCW Global / Cais etc, that host huge amounts of "snowshoe" spammers - http://www.spamhaus.org/faq/answers.lasso?section=Glossary#233 (you know, randomly named / named after a pattern domains, with anonymous whois or probably a PO box / UPS store in the whois contact, DNS served by the usual suspects like Moniker..) a /27 or /26 in a /24 might generate enough spam to drown the volume of legitimate email from the rest of the /24, and that would cause this kind of /24 block In some cases, such as 63.217/16 on CAIS / PCCW, there is NOTHING except spam coming from several /24s (and there's a /20 and a /21 out of it in spamhaus), and practically zero traffic from the rest of the /16. Or there's Cogent with a similar infestation spread around 38.106/16 ISPs with virtual hosting farms full of hacked cgi/php scripts, forwarders etc just dont trigger /24 blocks at the rate that ISPs hosting snowshoe spammers do. /24 blocks are simply a kind of motivation for large colo farms to try choosing between hosting spammers and hosting legitimate customers. srs ..

5 5

Re: the O(N^2) problem
by Edward B. DREGER 14 Apr '08

14 Apr '08

I received an off-list request: "Could you clarify what precisely you are trying to secure?" I fear that perhaps I am still too vague. When one accepts an email[*], one wishes for some sort of _a priori_ information regarding message trustworthiness. DKIM can vouch for message authenticity, but not trust. (A valid DKIM signature shows that selected headers/content have not been forged, but does not vouch for content.) If I receive email from someone I trust, there's a good chance it's something I want. If from someone who someone I trust trusts, there's still a good chance. As the chain lengthens, trust becomes a bit dicier. What I propose is orthogonal to DKIM. I've also been asked to set up a separate mailing list. I'll do that, and stop pollu^H^H^H^H^Htrying to elaborate on NANOG. [*] Discussion limited to one example, but could be expanded. Eddy -- Everquick Internet - http://www.everquick.net/ A division of Brotsman & Dreger, Inc. - http://www.brotsman.com/ Bandwidth, consulting, e-commerce, hosting, and network building Phone: +1 785 865 5885 Lawrence and [inter]national Phone: +1 316 794 8922 Wichita ________________________________________________________________________ DO NOT send mail to the following addresses: davidc(a)brics.com -*- jfconmaapaq(a)intc.net -*- sam(a)everquick.net Sending mail to spambait addresses is a great way to get blocked. Ditto for broken OOO autoresponders and foolish AV software backscatter.

2 1

Re: Problems sending mail to yahoo?
by Chris Stone 13 Apr '08

13 Apr '08

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 Matt Baldwin wrote: > mostly. It feels like a poorly implemented spam prevention system. > Doing some Google searches will turn up some more background on the > issue. We've been telling our users that Yahoo mail is problematic > and if they can to switch away from using them as their private email > or hosted email. Maybe we all should do the same to them until they quit spewing out all the Nigerian scams and the like that I've been seeing from their servers lately! Chris -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mandriva - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFH/lscnSVip47FEdMRCpwyAJ45+ARClupjQ6TlTJ37r+Yumk8F1ACcDVto WVQtKwWk5uKMq16KvnqwZXc= =ecRV -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

14 19

Re: Yahoo Mail Update
by Rob Szarka 13 Apr '08

13 Apr '08

At 08:49 AM 4/13/2008, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: >There are other lists, far more relevant than spam-l or nanae. Feel free to suggest some that you feel would be more appropriate or effective. Since reaching them via abuse(a)yahoo.com or any of their published phone numbers doesn't seem to work, backchannels are all that's left. (I do, however, subscribe to many lists and have yet to notice a presence of clueful Yahoo people on any of them.) >>Yahoo, for example, has chosen a business model (free email with >>little to no verification) that inevitably leads to spam being >>originated from their systems. > >So has hotmail, so have several of the domains that we host. Indeed, and I didn't mean to imply that Yahoo was necessarily worse than Hotmail (and several free email providers based outside the US, as far as I can tell). The difference, as I'm sure you're aware, is that some free email providers seem to care enough to minimize the costs they impose on the rest of us by responding appropriately to the inevitable abuse.

1 0

Dubai impound ships suspected in cable damage
by Sean Donelan 13 Apr '08

13 Apr '08

Wow, civilian satellite images are getting very sharp. http://www.hindu.com/2008/04/07/stories/2008040759181200.htm Using satellite images of ship movements in the area, Reliance Globalcom identified two ships in the area at the time which may have damaged the cable. Reliance also confirmed the cable was damaged because of "jerks and force of the ship."

11 17

Re: Yahoo Mail Update
by Matthew Petach 13 Apr '08

13 Apr '08

On 4/10/08, chuck goolsbee <chucklist(a)forest.net> wrote: > > An anonymous source at Yahoo told me that they have pushed > > a config update sometime today out to their servers to help with these > > deferral issues. > > > > Please don't ask me to play proxy on this one of any > > other issues you may have, but take a look at your queues and > > they should be getting better. > > > > - Jared > > Thanks for the update Jared. I can understand your request to not be used > as a proxy, but it exposes the reason why Yahoo is thought to be clueless: > They are completely opaque. > > They can not exist in this community without having some visibity and > interaction on an operational level. > > Yahoo should have a look at how things are done at AOL. While the feedback > loop from the *users* at AOL is mostly a source of entertainment, dealing > with the postmaster staff at AOL is a benchmark in how it should be done. *heh* Well, depending upon how the battle turns out, Yahoo is likely to go the way of whomever its new partner will be--which will either be more like AOL, or more like Hotmail. Sounds like there's already some amount of preference at least among this group as to which way they'd prefer to see the battle go. ^_^; Matt > Proxy that message over and perhaps this issue of Yahoo's perennially > broken mail causing the rest of us headaches will go away. It seems to come > up here on nanog and over on the mailop list every few weeks. > > --chuck

1 0

Weekly Routing Table Report
by Routing Analysis Role Account 11 Apr '08

11 Apr '08

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 For historical data, please see http://thyme.apnic.net. If you have any comments please contact Philip Smith <pfs(a)cisco.com>. Routing Table Report 04:00 +10GMT Sat 12 Apr, 2008 Report Website: http://thyme.apnic.net Detailed Analysis: http://thyme.apnic.net/current/ Analysis Summary ---------------- BGP routing table entries examined: 252904 Prefixes after maximum aggregation: 126821 Deaggregation factor: 1.99 Unique aggregates announced to Internet: 121965 Total ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 27875 Prefixes per ASN: 9.07 Origin-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 24291 Origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 11291 Transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 3584 Transit-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 84 Average AS path length visible in the Internet Routing Table: 3.6 Max AS path length visible: 19 Max AS path prepend of ASN (43380) 13 Prefixes from unregistered ASNs in the Routing Table: 25207 Unregistered ASNs in the Routing Table: 1888 Number of 32-bit ASNs allocated by the RIRs: 45 Prefixes from 32-bit ASNs in the Routing Table: 9 Special use prefixes present in the Routing Table: 0 Prefixes being announced from unallocated address space: 836 Number of addresses announced to Internet: 1862827616 Equivalent to 111 /8s, 8 /16s and 126 /24s Percentage of available address space announced: 50.3 Percentage of allocated address space announced: 61.7 Percentage of available address space allocated: 81.4 Percentage of address space in use by end-sites: 71.2 Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 120992 APNIC Region Analysis Summary ----------------------------- Prefixes being announced by APNIC Region ASes: 42772 Total APNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation: 13613 APNIC Deaggregation factor: 3.14 Prefixes being announced from the APNIC address blocks: 55035 Unique aggregates announced from the APNIC address blocks: 23927 APNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 1919 APNIC Prefixes per ASN: 28.68 APNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 555 APNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 349 Average APNIC Region AS path length visible: 3.7 Max APNIC Region AS path length visible: 15 Number of APNIC addresses announced to Internet: 342856544 Equivalent to 20 /8s, 111 /16s and 147 /24s Percentage of available APNIC address space announced: 78.6 APNIC AS Blocks 4608-4864, 7467-7722, 9216-10239, 17408-18431 (pre-ERX allocations) 23552-24575, 37888-38911, 45056-46079 APNIC Address Blocks 58/8, 59/8, 60/8, 61/8, 114/8, 115/8, 116/8, 117/8, 118/8, 119/8, 120/8, 121/8, 122/8, 123/8, 124/8, 125/8, 126/8, 202/8, 203/8, 210/8, 211/8, 218/8, 219/8, 220/8, 221/8, 222/8, ARIN Region Analysis Summary ---------------------------- Prefixes being announced by ARIN Region ASes: 107454 Total ARIN prefixes after maximum aggregation: 59183 ARIN Deaggregation factor: 1.82 Prefixes being announced from the ARIN address blocks: 86373 Unique aggregates announced from the ARIN address blocks: 34178 ARIN Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 11700 ARIN Prefixes per ASN: 7.38 ARIN Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 4553 ARIN Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 1044 Average ARIN Region AS path length visible: 3.4 Max ARIN Region AS path length visible: 16 Number of ARIN addresses announced to Internet: 362456384 Equivalent to 21 /8s, 154 /16s and 165 /24s Percentage of available ARIN address space announced: 74.5 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, 39936-40959 ARIN Address Blocks 24/8, 63/8, 64/8, 65/8, 66/8, 67/8, 68/8, 69/8, 70/8, 71/8, 72/8, 73/8, 74/8, 75/8, 76/8, 96/8, 97/8, 98/8, 99/8, 173/8, 174/8, 199/8, 204/8, 205/8, 206/8, 207/8, 208/8, 209/8, 216/8, RIPE Region Analysis Summary ---------------------------- Prefixes being announced by RIPE Region ASes: 54199 Total RIPE prefixes after maximum aggregation: 33333 RIPE Deaggregation factor: 1.63 Prefixes being announced from the RIPE address blocks: 49410 Unique aggregates announced from the RIPE address blocks: 32107 RIPE Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 11166 RIPE Prefixes per ASN: 4.43 RIPE Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 5830 RIPE Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 1707 Average RIPE Region AS path length visible: 4.0 Max RIPE Region AS path length visible: 18 Number of RIPE addresses announced to Internet: 354345856 Equivalent to 21 /8s, 30 /16s and 227 /24s Percentage of available RIPE address space announced: 81.2 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 40960-45055 RIPE Address Blocks 62/8, 77/8, 78/8, 79/8, 80/8, 81/8, 82/8, 83/8, 84/8, 85/8, 86/8, 87/8, 88/8, 89/8, 90/8, 91/8, 92/8, 93/8, 94/8, 95/8, 193/8, 194/8, 195/8, 212/8, 213/8, 217/8, LACNIC Region Analysis Summary ------------------------------ Prefixes being announced by LACNIC Region ASes: 19596 Total LACNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation: 4892 LACNIC Deaggregation factor: 4.01 Prefixes being announced from the LACNIC address blocks: 17971 Unique aggregates announced from the LACNIC address blocks: 9697 LACNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 889 LACNIC Prefixes per ASN: 20.21 LACNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 276 LACNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 154 Average LACNIC Region AS path length visible: 4.0 Max LACNIC Region AS path length visible: 19 Number of LACNIC addresses announced to Internet: 50467072 Equivalent to 3 /8s, 2 /16s and 17 /24s Percentage of available LACNIC address space announced: 50.1 LACNIC AS Blocks 26592-26623, 27648-28671, plus ERX transfers LACNIC Address Blocks 186/8, 187/8, 189/8, 190/8, 200/8, 201/8, AfriNIC Region Analysis Summary ------------------------------- Prefixes being announced by AfriNIC Region ASes: 3675 Total AfriNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation: 1129 AfriNIC Deaggregation factor: 3.26 Prefixes being announced from the AfriNIC address blocks: 4027 Unique aggregates announced from the AfriNIC address blocks: 1683 AfriNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 234 AfriNIC Prefixes per ASN: 17.21 AfriNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 77 AfriNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 44 Average AfriNIC Region AS path length visible: 3.8 Max AfriNIC Region AS path length visible: 14 Number of AfriNIC addresses announced to Internet: 10229760 Equivalent to 0 /8s, 156 /16s and 24 /24s Percentage of available AfriNIC address space announced: 30.5 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 4755 1627 387 89 Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd. Aut 9498 1162 550 60 BHARTI BT INTERNET LTD. 9583 1157 99 211 Sify Limited 17488 1008 68 78 Hathway IP Over Cable Interne 4134 858 12659 319 CHINANET-BACKBONE 4766 853 6006 343 Korea Telecom (KIX) 18101 673 127 52 Reliance Infocom Ltd Internet 4812 613 962 92 China Telecom (Shanghai) 9829 598 450 12 BSNL National Internet Backbo 1221 546 1934 419 Telstra Pty Ltd Complete listing at http://thyme.apnic.net/current/data-ASnet-APNIC ARIN Region per AS prefix count summary --------------------------------------- ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 7018 1443 5934 1022 AT&T WorldNet Services 4323 1428 1029 376 Time Warner Telecom 2386 1380 642 855 AT&T Data Communications Serv 11492 1211 145 55 Cable One 7011 1088 317 619 Citizens Utilities 18566 1042 296 10 Covad Communications 1785 1005 479 107 AppliedTheory Corporation 6197 983 597 507 BellSouth Network Solutions, 174 969 6835 809 Cogent Communications 20115 923 876 512 Charter Communications Complete listing at http://thyme.apnic.net/current/data-ASnet-ARIN RIPE Region per AS prefix count summary --------------------------------------- ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 3292 402 1787 366 TDC Tele Danmark 3301 338 1459 307 TeliaNet Sweden 8452 329 188 7 TEDATA 3320 326 7045 270 Deutsche Telekom AG 5462 292 666 26 Telewest Broadband 8866 292 78 24 Bulgarian Telecommunication C 8551 281 269 37 Bezeq International 3215 279 2679 89 France Telecom Transpac 6746 267 127 244 Dynamic Network Technologies, 8708 261 421 248 Romania Data Systems S.A. Complete listing at http://thyme.apnic.net/current/data-ASnet-RIPE LACNIC Region per AS prefix count summary ----------------------------------------- ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 8151 1190 2448 220 UniNet S.A. de C.V. 22047 557 270 14 VTR PUNTO NET S.A. 11830 555 299 9 Instituto Costarricense de El 7303 450 220 59 Telecom Argentina Stet-France 16814 426 27 10 NSS, S.A. 11172 411 117 70 Servicios Alestra S.A de C.V 6471 402 85 39 ENTEL CHILE S.A. 10620 399 104 51 TVCABLE BOGOTA 14117 383 25 15 Telefonica del Sur S.A. 10481 310 152 10 Prima S.A. Complete listing at http://thyme.apnic.net/current/data-ASnet-LACNIC AfriNIC Region per AS prefix count summary ------------------------------------------ ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 24863 463 61 27 LINKdotNET AS number 3741 287 853 223 The Internet Solution 20858 216 34 3 EgyNet 2018 207 256 109 Tertiary Education Network 6713 143 135 11 Itissalat Al-MAGHRIB 33783 134 9 12 EEPAD TISP TELECOM & INTERNET 5536 121 8 16 Internet Egypt Network 29571 118 13 8 Ci Telecom Autonomous system 33776 99 6 7 Starcomms Nigeria Limited 24835 89 48 7 RAYA Telecom - Egypt Complete listing at http://thyme.apnic.net/current/data-ASnet-AFRINIC Global Per AS prefix count summary ---------------------------------- ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 6389 2476 3019 102 bellsouth.net, inc. 23577 1634 34 699 Korea Telecom (ATM-MPLS) 4755 1627 387 89 Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd. Aut 7018 1443 5934 1022 AT&T WorldNet Services 4323 1428 1029 376 Time Warner Telecom 2386 1380 642 855 AT&T Data Communications Serv 11492 1211 145 55 Cable One 8151 1190 2448 220 UniNet S.A. de C.V. 9498 1162 550 60 BHARTI BT INTERNET LTD. 9583 1157 99 211 Sify Limited Complete listing at http://thyme.apnic.net/current/data-ASnet Global Per AS Maximum Aggr summary ---------------------------------- ASN No of nets Net Savings Description 4755 1627 1538 Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd. Aut 11492 1211 1156 Cable One 9498 1162 1102 BHARTI BT INTERNET LTD. 4323 1428 1052 Time Warner Telecom 18566 1042 1032 Covad Communications 8151 1190 970 UniNet S.A. de C.V. 17676 1016 951 Softbank BB Corp. 9583 1157 946 Sify Limited 23577 1634 935 Korea Telecom (ATM-MPLS) 17488 1008 930 Hathway IP Over Cable Interne Complete listing at http://thyme.apnic.net/current/data-CIDRnet List of Unregistered Origin ASNs (Global) ----------------------------------------- Bad AS Designation Network Transit AS Description 14780 UNALLOCATED 4.79.181.0/24 10310 Yahoo! 12180 UNALLOCATED 4.79.248.0/24 1239 Sprint 12180 UNALLOCATED 8.10.16.0/24 3549 Global Crossing 12180 UNALLOCATED 8.10.58.0/23 3549 Global Crossing 14779 UNALLOCATED 8.12.144.0/24 10310 Yahoo! 16927 UNALLOCATED 12.0.252.0/23 7018 AT&T WorldNet Servic 22492 UNALLOCATED 12.2.46.0/24 1239 Sprint 15132 UNALLOCATED 12.9.150.0/24 701 UUNET Technologies, 32567 UNALLOCATED 12.14.170.0/24 7018 AT&T WorldNet Servic 13632 UNALLOCATED 12.20.55.0/24 6517 Yipes Communications Complete listing at http://thyme.apnic.net/current/data-badAS Advertised Unallocated Addresses -------------------------------- Network Origin AS Description 24.51.159.0/24 7843 Adelphia Corp. 24.54.224.0/19 20001 HoldCo LLC - Road Runner 24.75.160.0/19 7843 Adelphia Corp. 24.75.192.0/18 7843 Adelphia Corp. 24.142.40.0/21 7018 AT&T WorldNet Services 24.142.160.0/19 7018 AT&T WorldNet Services 24.246.0.0/17 7018 AT&T WorldNet Services 24.246.128.0/18 7018 AT&T WorldNet Services 62.61.220.0/24 24974 Tachyon Europe BV - Wireless 63.140.213.0/24 22555 Universal Talkware Corporatio Complete listing at http://thyme.apnic.net/current/data-add-IANA Number of prefixes announced per prefix length (Global) ------------------------------------------------------- /1:0 /2:0 /3:0 /4:0 /5:0 /6:0 /7:0 /8:20 /9:9 /10:16 /11:42 /12:138 /13:280 /14:504 /15:1004 /16:9833 /17:4354 /18:7305 /19:15325 /20:17696 /21:16964 /22:21534 /23:22504 /24:133061 /25:793 /26:910 /27:487 /28:107 /29:9 /30:1 /31:0 /32:8 Advertised prefixes smaller than registry allocations ----------------------------------------------------- ASN No of nets Total ann. Description 11492 1197 1211 Cable One 2386 1082 1380 AT&T Data Communications Serv 18566 1023 1042 Covad Communications 9583 995 1157 Sify Limited 7011 970 1088 Citizens Utilities 4755 965 1627 Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd. Aut 6478 905 906 AT&T Worldnet Services 9498 834 1162 BHARTI BT INTERNET LTD. 17488 820 1008 Hathway IP Over Cable Interne 7018 815 1443 AT&T WorldNet Services Complete listing at http://thyme.apnic.net/current/data/sXXas-nos Number of /24s announced per /8 block (Global) ---------------------------------------------- 4:9 8:106 12:1994 13:1 15:20 16:3 17:6 18:13 20:35 24:1055 25:1 32:60 33:4 38:411 40:94 41:633 44:2 47:8 52:3 55:3 56:3 57:22 58:513 59:451 60:405 61:982 62:1085 63:1956 64:3386 65:2371 66:3648 67:1132 68:679 69:2147 70:606 71:125 72:1659 73:6 74:933 75:225 76:286 77:629 78:568 79:142 80:902 81:820 82:601 83:368 84:564 85:986 86:398 87:650 88:320 89:1240 90:11 91:1167 92:247 93:275 96:23 97:16 98:132 99:3 116:597 117:282 118:113 119:383 120:7 121:489 122:745 123:314 124:840 125:1101 128:318 129:200 130:125 131:397 132:65 133:9 134:180 135:32 136:220 137:113 138:147 139:65 140:485 141:109 142:427 143:279 144:345 145:50 146:344 147:134 148:499 149:180 150:128 151:175 152:142 153:127 154:11 155:266 156:207 157:263 158:169 159:224 160:252 161:111 162:210 163:194 164:576 165:436 166:298 167:315 168:612 169:131 170:427 171:28 172:2 189:172 190:1740 192:5789 193:4108 194:3277 195:2390 196:1040 198:3781 199:3236 200:5579 201:1384 202:7576 203:7838 204:4009 205:2100 206:2390 207:2741 208:3255 209:3504 210:2540 211:1041 212:1343 213:1652 214:457 215:48 216:4278 217:1208 218:361 219:408 220:1067 221:397 222:311 End of report

1 0