Re: [anti-spam-wg] Fwd: Re: Re: NCC#2007083003 Fwd: DELIVERY FAILURE:

  • To: apwg-chairs@localhost, address-policy-wg@localhost, anti-spam-wg@localhost
  • From: der Mouse mouse@localhost
  • Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2007 22:36:48 -0400 (EDT)

>>> The scope of this problem is much larger than ICANN or the
>>> Internet.  We need to press for the same application of power
>>> against communication abusers by the equivalent authorities who
>>> assign telephone numbers and postal addresses.
>> In the case of telephone numbers, the delegated-to entities (the
>> telcos) do take the responsibility - they don't ignore abuse.
> They have specific statutory rights and obligations as carriers, not
> as registrars.  (Note, for example, that number portability now
> nicely separates the registration function from carriage.)

Not really; porting a number - where possible; I assume you're talking
NANPA here - transfers the registration as well as the carriage.  In
particular, consider porting it a second time; the original carrier,
the one whom you are arguing is still registrar, is out of the loop.

>> In the case of postal addresses, [...]
> Again, carriage is distinguished from registration.

I suspect it depends on jurisdiction.

But, in any case, the carrier enforces against abuse, so the registrars
have nothing to do in that regard.  Since there is a monopoly postal
carrier, that situation is not very analogous to the Internet.

In the telephone case, it depends.  In some places, there is a monopoly
carrier, and the above remarks apply.  In places where there isn't,
like the USA, a carrier that did not deal with abusers on its service
would need to be slapped down.  As far as I know, all such places also
have something like the USA's common-carrier status, with legal
oversight dealing with rogue actors in the telco space.  If there is a
jursidction with no monopoly carrier and no government oversight, then,
yes, it probably needs attention from someone, quite possibly the
number registrar(s).

If the above assumptions fail, there will be similar problems in the
telephone and postal realms, yes.  It's possible there are places now
(perhaps even the USA) where the stage is set for problems, and they
just haven't got big enough yet to be very visible.  If abuses start
growing in the telephone or postal worlds, it would be worth taking a
good look around for a mismatch between authority and responsibility.

In any case, none of that is really very relevant to the Internet.
Whether bad things are happening in place B doesn't mean that they're
not in place A, nor that place A's bad things don't need attention.
The only way this is relevant is if there is a long-standing mismatch
between authority and responsibility somewhere that hasn't been abused,
which if so is a point against my theory; I'm not convinced either
telco or post is an example.

/~\ The ASCII				der Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
 X  Against HTML	       mouse@localhost
/ \ Email!	     7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B