> This targeting of the infrastructure layer is leaving a really bad taste in mouth. The complained raised to LACNIC was a real one and once they investigated,

> This targeting of the infrastructure layer is leaving a really bad taste in mouth. The complained raised to LACNIC was a real one and once they investigated, it was no longer in relation to the content, but to their policies. You may be in disagreement with that policy, but I personally believe it does make sense. There's a big shortage of IPV4, so it does makes sense that if you find out that they aren't used in your region, that you takes them out. Imagine how you would feel to be in the LACNIC region struggling to get a few IP to find out that Russian company got thousands of them from your region... The strange thing though, is that they don't mentions anything about the actual infrastructure. Do they have the IP but used them in others regions? Or the mere fact that they weren't used locally was the issue? If I was LACNIC, I would have just required them to use local infrastructure, which I'm sure DDOS-Guard can do.