[anti-abuse-wg] Enabling community self-help?
Suresh Ramasubramanian ops.lists at gmail.com
Fri Mar 30 06:06:38 CEST 2012
BTW Gert - never mind the "spam is illegal or not" type argument here. Let us try it another way. Does the average russian botmaster who submits paperwork for a new /20 say he needs the /20 to host his botnet c&cs? Or something else entirely? In other words, besides all the ranting about how you are not the document police so you can't possibly verify the registrant .. does that document policing argument also extend to not verifying all the weird and wonderful stories about media streaming, colo etc that the botmaster spins RIPE NCC in his allocation paperwork? Kind of reminds me of all the interesting stories I get when I evaluate apricot and sanog fellowship applications .. some people will write anything at all they please to get a paid holiday to Singapore or wherever.. so there absolutely has to be verification and feedback somewhere in the process or else deserving candidates get left out while some freeloader with a convincing application manages to get himself a paid holiday. So how would "document police" be an accepted and necessary practice in ops and RIR circles when verifying something like awarding a few hundred dollars worth of fellowship to a person, and become taboo when talking about verifying who is applying for all that IP space, and for what purpose? --srs On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 1:32 AM, Gert Doering <gert at space.net> wrote: > > Are these criminals because a judge said so, or because you do not like > their business practices? > > This is a serious question. -- Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.lists at gmail.com)