Fwd: [anti-abuse-wg] 196.52.0.0/14 revoked, cleanup efforts needed
196.52.0.0/14 seems to have been revoked by afrinic:
$ whois -h whois.afrinic.net " --list-versions 196.52.0.0/14" | grep -i delete % This object was deleted on 2021-01-16 05:56 $
Regarding cleanup of route: objects for this this (and other) unregistered address space in the ripe irrdb, can this just be done? Or is it necessary to create a policy to ask the NCC to do it? Nick -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: [anti-abuse-wg] 196.52.0.0/14 revoked, cleanup efforts needed Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2021 05:00:49 +0400 From: Ostap Efremov <kkind690@gmail.com> To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net Hi, 196.52.0.0/14 <http://196.52.0.0/14> was recently revoked. Before it was revoked, the whois for this /14 was: inetnum: 196.52.0.0 - 196.55.255.255 netname: LogicWeb-Inc descr: LogicWeb Inc. descr: 3003 Woodbridge Ave descr: Edison, NJ 08837 country: ZA remarks: ============REMARK==================== remarks: The custodianship of this IP prefix is presently remarks: in dispute. A police investigation is on-going remarks: and AFRINIC reserves the right to remarks: reclaim this IP prefix at anytime. remarks: ============REMARK=================== However, now, this /14 has been revoked by AFRINIC. Do a whois on it and you will see, it's unallocated. I believe this /14 was under control from our big friend from Israel, but I don't remember. This does not matter however. But, sadly there are about 367 ip ranges being announced from this /14 https://pastebin.com/raw/MHaW3nPe From about 71 unique ASN's This is a BOGON, unallocated space. I would appreciate if any network that is on that list and on this mailing list, would stop announcing parts of this hijacked /14. I reached out to RADB to remove all the radb entries concerning this /14, however after 72 hours they still haven't. This is not an ignored ticket, we have escalated internally with our RADb admins and they are looking into it. I will let them know that you are looking for a update and we will provide it as soon as possible. How is it possible that they can't just delete all entries? It is UNALLOCATED SPACE, it shouldn't be routed, it shouldn't have radb. https://www.radb.net/query?advanced_query=1&keywords=-M+196.52.0.0%2F14&-T+option=&ip_option=&-i+option=&db=RADB I have also tried to post about this massive source of BOGONS on the nanog mailing list, however, they rejected my posts. Most likely because it possibly concerns "that one guy from Israel", however the nanog moderators refused to comment while continuing to reject my posts. Their self-censorship is very destructive and harmful. I hope that if this list is moderated, I will not have any trouble posting about this issue. Greetings, Ostap.
Hi, On 21/01/2021 01:27, Nick Hilliard via db-wg wrote:
196.52.0.0/14 seems to have been revoked by afrinic:
$ whois -h whois.afrinic.net " --list-versions 196.52.0.0/14" | grep -i delete % This object was deleted on 2021-01-16 05:56 $
Regarding cleanup of route: objects for this this (and other) unregistered address space in the ripe irrdb, can this just be done? Or is it necessary to create a policy to ask the NCC to do it?
would like that too (to get done, and if policy needed clarity about it) https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/db-wg/2020-September/006645.html Frank
On 20 Jan 2021, at 22:27, Nick Hilliard via db-wg wrote:
Regarding cleanup of route: objects for this this (and other) unregistered address space in the ripe irrdb, can this just be done? Or is it necessary to create a policy to ask the NCC to do it?
Creating a policy seems to me to be too heavy an approach in this case. I would think that a simple request from the DB WG to the NCC should be enough. If a greater degree of formality were considered necessary, a new NWI could be created. I hope this helps. Niall O’Reilly RIPE Vice-Chair
Niall O'Reilly wrote on 22/01/2021 09:55:
Creating a policy seems to me to be too heavy an approach in this case.
I would think that a simple request from the DB WG to the NCC should be enough.
If a greater degree of formality were considered necessary, a new NWI could be created.
there are two issues here: the immediate one relates to removal of these particular objects, but there's a longer term issue of whether the NCC needs to be asked by the community to delete all objects which are deregistered from the other LIRs on an ongoing basis. Honestly I would have thought probably not because this sounds like the sort of thing that falls into general garbage cleanup, i.e. normal stewardship of resources. Could someone from the NCC clarify what the current situation with this is? Is this something which is currently dealt with, and if not, could it be? The reverse is also relevant. I.e. the RIPE NCC probably needs to publish lists of resources which have been deregistered so that other RIRs / IRRDBs can delete objects which refer to those resources which date from before the date of deregistration. Nick
participants (3)
-
Frank Habicht -
Niall O'Reilly -
Nick Hilliard