-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Jordan Lowe [mailto:jordan@servercentral.net] wrote:

Who are you to start publicly trying to deeper people? Nlayer has a great noc, I am a customer, and know many more. They are currently migrating from 4474 to 4436 due to the asn issue, and its not illegal to source a route from two asn's.

AS4474 is not theirs, for that matter it currently doesn't belong to anyone as there is not valid contact information registered in the ARIN database.

They're almost done with the migration, I didn't see any emails from you when cogent was renumbering from 16631 to 174 asking for a depeering.

Because I am not watching IPv4 tables and cogent announced it. Also both those ASN's are properly registered in the registries. Next to that Cogent does respond to inquiries.

If you just emailed or called they would have glady resolved your issue. Can you explain the operational problem with this dual announcement? I seem to be missing it.

I am a user of the internet who asked for a answer at their NOC from which I got *no* reply, except for ticket numbers, even after sending 2 messages the last two weeks. Which then caused me to inquire NANOG which is a correct list to do so as nLayer is a US based (North American) "ISP". Next to that mentioning nLayer to abuse-tracking people seems to also get a response that there is quite a lot of abuse in the forms of spam from them. Is that the reason they are 'migrating' to hide their paths from the spam aware people? Maybe you, as a perfect customer, can ask them to update their objects in the ARIN registry or stop hijacking internet resources? Greets, Jeroen -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: Unfix PGP for Outlook Comment: Jeroen Massar / http://unfix.org/~jeroen/ iQBGBAERAgAQCRApqihSMz58IwUCQFb/hgAA5fkAn0vQ8ShpW7djG0i9rYD0eGgy Lg90AKCveqh1xoaJWhMGAkwo+TuHoUUXXw== =X7/h -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----