[address-policy-wg] New Draft Document: De-boganising New Address Blocks
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] New Draft Document: De-boganising New Address Blocks
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] New Draft Document: De-boganising New Address Blocks
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Jon Lawrence
jon at lawrence.org.uk
Wed Feb 25 19:12:13 CET 2004
On Wednesday 25 February 2004 14:19, Daniel Karrenberg wrote: > > on re-reading this message this morning I realise that its tone was a > bit inappropriate. My only excuse is the serious abuse I have been > exposed to in private messages since I posted this draft. It looks like > a lot of people take me personally responsible for out-dated bogon > filters I have no responsibility for whatsoever. Once again, apologies > for the tone of voice. > > The message remains: If you want the RIRs to do the pro-active testing > and notofocation that I propose you will have to make your voice heared > to them, just as you have to make your voice heared if you believe they > should not do this. > No worries, tone was fine by me :) and I can see no reason as to why people should send you any abuse. The question is a valid question - should more proactive notification be something that the RIR's do or not ?. Regards, Jon
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] New Draft Document: De-boganising New Address Blocks
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] New Draft Document: De-boganising New Address Blocks
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]