Jump to content

Finding/using Upstreams & Adjacencies to report


Recommended Posts

There was and inquiry on the .help NG on this topic re a problem with webrider.ru. I pulled up my current fave tool, www.openrbl.org and came up with a few ideas. I would appreciate EXPERT feedback on whether I am heading in the right direction.

First is the obvious WHOIS and Abusenet type of stuff:


Address: resolved to webrider.ru

AS: AS8342 Rostelecom Internet Center (Russ Moscow/Moskva

Net WEBRIDER Moscow, Moskva, Rossiya [at]webrider.ru



NS-Delegation for 217.107.217.*: (*.webrider.ru)

217.107.217.in-addr.arpa -> ns.rtcomm.ru

217.107.217.in-addr.arpa -> ns.rt.ru

webrider.ru -> ns.webrider.ru

webrider.ru -> ns1.webrider.ru



Abuse-Whois webrider.ru: (webrider.ru; RIPE/WEBRIDER; webrider.ru;


[Querying whois.abuse.net]


abuse[at]webrider.ru (for webrider.ru)



Abuse-Whois rtcomm.ru: (217.107.217.in-addr.arpa)



abuse[at]rtcomm.ru (for rtcomm.ru)



Abuse-Whois rt.ru: (217.107.217.in-addr.arpa)



abuse[at]rt.ru (for rt.ru)

rtcomm.ru is one of the NameServer hosts, another is rt.ru

I regularly see reports go through to rtcom.ru, but use postmaster[at]rtcom.ru

as well as abuse, try abuse at rt.ru as well.

SmapCop also shows uljashin[at]webrider.ru, magdesiev[at]webrider.ru for webrider.ru , did you try

either of those?

According to "The Robban

Tool"(http://www.netlantis.org/index.html?menu=2&page=robban), 98% of

webrider traffic routes via uu.net (or uk.uu.net or alter.net) all of which

are the same company and are mci holdings: abuse[at]mci.com

The Potaroo Report, http://bgp.potaroo.net/cgi-bin/as-report?as=AS8342

shows that rtcomm and mci look good as well, confirming the above, I think.

AS Adjancency Report

The full report follows:

" In the context of this report "Upstream" indicates that there is an

adjacent AS that lines between the BGP table collection point (in this case

at AS4637) as the specified AS. Similarly, "Downstream" referes to an

adjacent AS that lies beyond the specified AS. This upstream / downstream

categorisation is strictly a description relative topology, and should not

be confused with provider / customer / peer inter-AS relationships.


RTComm.RU Autonomous System

Adjacency: 60 Upstream: 1 Downstream: 59

Upstream Adjacent AS list

AS702 AS702 MCI EMEA "

These were ALL accessed via the oprlbl.org

pages, I find them very helpful. I am by NO MEANS at all an expert.Mr

Easter, other .routing folks, am I starting to get this right ?

If not, please give some direction.


Link to comment
Share on other sites


This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Create New...