[anti-abuse-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 ]
Suresh Ramasubramanian
ops.lists at gmail.com
Tue Mar 8 00:43:46 CET 2016
Yes of course. I mean to say - legacy IP space isn't immune to compromise or whatever else that causes phish urls, so every so often a manual step does come into the process when I run into a comments field We wouldn't be having this longish discussion otherwise --srs > On 08-Mar-2016, at 1:05 AM, denis <ripedenis at yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > > The legacy resources are the only resources in the RIPE Database that currently do not all have an abuse-c. If you use the tools provided by the NCC you should not need to do any manual lookups or read comments.
- 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 ]