[anti-abuse-wg] [policy-announce] 2017-02 Review Phase (Regular abuse-c Validation)
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] [policy-announce] 2017-02 Review Phase (Regular abuse-c Validation)
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] [policy-announce] 2017-02 Review Phase (Regular abuse-c Validation)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Brian Nisbet
brian.nisbet at heanet.ie
Fri Jan 19 17:33:48 CET 2018
Thomas, On 19/01/2018 15:44, Thomas Hungenberg wrote: > On 19.01.2018 13:08, Marco Schmidt wrote: >> The way that abuse reports are handled by the receiving party is >> usually defined by the internal procedures of the providers and not by RIPE >> Policies. > > If the abuse-mailbox is valid but the resource holder constantly ignores > abuse complaints sent to this mailbox for a longer time (no response, > no action taken, phishing sites or botnet c2s etc. not taken down) - > what is the process to escalate this (probably finally leading to the > resource being withdrawn)? There is no process being proposed for this in 2017-02. This proposal is about validation of the abuse-mailbox attribute. If the community would like there to be the possibility of further action in relation to this specific situation, then a separate policy proposal would be required. Thanks, Brian Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] [policy-announce] 2017-02 Review Phase (Regular abuse-c Validation)
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] [policy-announce] 2017-02 Review Phase (Regular abuse-c Validation)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]