This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net/
[anti-abuse-wg] Hijacked netblocks - any SOP for these?
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Hijacked netblocks - any SOP for these?
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Hijacked netblocks - any SOP for these?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Florian Weimer
fw at deneb.enyo.de
Thu Jul 28 20:44:12 CEST 2011
* Suresh Ramasubramanian: > Freshly added to spamhaus - My personal problem with these reports is that they are totally incomprehensible to me. Why do you think the netblocks have been hijacked? Maybe the documentation in the WHOIS database is outdated, and Link Telecom still enjoys full control over those prefixes.
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Hijacked netblocks - any SOP for these?
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Hijacked netblocks - any SOP for these?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]