[anti-abuse-wg] Abuse Contact Information - Policy Proposal
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Abuse Contact Information - Policy Proposal
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Abuse Contact Information - Policy Proposal
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Tobias Knecht
tk at abusix.com
Mon Jul 26 08:29:15 CEST 2010
Hi, >> The next step is a policy proposal that does the following things: >> >> - Introduce the IRT Object into ASN Objects. >> - Make the abuse-mailbox attribute mandatory for the IRT Objects. >> - Make IRT Objects mandatory for directly by RIPE delegated Ranges. > > So why are you not going to propose that under PDP? Because I think a Best Practice Paper is easier to find consensus. But you are absolutely right there has to be a policy proposal in future. And there will be one. ;-) Thanks, Tobias -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 262 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/anti-abuse-wg/attachments/20100726/3b82c3c7/attachment.sig>
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Abuse Contact Information - Policy Proposal
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Abuse Contact Information - Policy Proposal
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]