[anti-abuse-wg] [db-wg] objection to RIPE policy proposal 2016-01
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] [db-wg] objection to RIPE policy proposal 2016-01
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] [db-wg] objection to RIPE policy proposal 2016-01
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
andre at ox.co.za
andre at ox.co.za
Thu Mar 3 11:02:28 CET 2016
On Thu, 03 Mar 2016 18:51:03 +0900 Randy Bush <randy at psg.com> wrote: > > there has to be accurate records for abuse-c > really? and how does abuse-c affect the effective operation of the > ncc resource registry. > it makes iet easier for the ncc to know who deals with abuse issues which includes, but is not limited to: law enforcement (kiddie porn, etc etc), the sync of warrants for courts and a few others > abuse-c is a convenience for ops. > no, not just ops, .... and, sometimes abuse is a pain (well, it is for some and sometimes end up forwarding up and down and being a project manager and/or in cc and bcc where one really do not care to be in) > > many network managers do not respond/reply to abuse, this does not > > mean that the complaints are not actioned, for example > > *abuse at google.com is a black hole > great idea. i will make my abuse-c:s be blackhole at bogus.com > great, as you said - this is your freedom :) > randy
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] [db-wg] objection to RIPE policy proposal 2016-01
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] [db-wg] objection to RIPE policy proposal 2016-01
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]