[anti-abuse-wg] Hijacked netblocks - any SOP for these?
Kostas Zorbadelos kzorba at otenet.gr
Tue Aug 9 15:59:43 CEST 2011
On 08/09/2011 04:37 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > Which is what is sought to be addressed. Granted the due diligence > exists, but the fact remains that there are botmasters and spammers > who manage to game this process. > > While the LIR revocation process exists, a more "user friendly" / > transparent complaint handling mechanism and periodic audits might > make things interesting > Do you Suresh, or anyone else, know what, if any, are the policies in other RIRs in respect to the problem of faked evidence to get IP number resources? Do other RIRs have audit rules or policies that work well? And in any case what seems to be the problem (if any) in the RIPE region specifically? I remember Richard Cox of Spamhaus keep repeating problems in the RIPE region but no policies or proposals ever came. I am far from expert, but it would be a good thing if someone could summarize what seem to be problem areas in the RIPE region and what other RIRs are doing. Kostas > On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 7:04 PM, Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet > <Woeber at cc.univie.ac.at> wrote: >> >> But if you succeed in forging that type of documents, or if you succeed to >> get some "official entity" to help in doing that, the NCC is at the loosing >> end of the stick :-( > > >