Based on the ASName of both AS, including CELLCO which is the actual name of the corporate entity known as Verizon Wireless, I would agree that both are in fact Verizon Wireless. The contacts are just corporate standard entities. Shane
On Feb 19, 2024, at 9:01 PM, Richard Laager <rlaager@wiktel.com> wrote:
I see the route originated by two different ASNs. I agree that when I use the AS6167 path, it is broken (for the destinations where it is broken; 63.59.166.100 was working despite using the AS6167 path).
BGP routing table entry for 63.59.0.0/16 Paths: 2 available 6939 701 22394 184.105.34.254 from 184.105.34.254 (216.218.253.228) Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 60, IGP metric 0, weight 0, tag 0 Received 21d19h ago, valid, external, best Rx SAFI: Unicast 6461 701 6167 69.89.205.202 from 69.89.205.202 (69.89.205.202) Origin IGP, metric 887, localpref 60, IGP metric 40, weight 0, tag 0 Received 4d03h ago, valid, internal Community: 6461:5997 Rx SAFI: Unicast
Based on the names in WHOIS, I would say that both AS6167 and AS22394 are Verizon Wireless.
-- Richard