[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 ]
Nick Hilliard
nick at foobar.org
Mon Jan 22 17:07:56 CET 2018
JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via anti-abuse-wg wrote: > I agree that exaggeration is not useful, and probably we need to have > several clear attempts before turning down a contract, BUT, if we are > talking about proportionality, there are MANY cases of abuses where > the responsible LIRs aren't responding at all, and this means a very > big harm to the networks being abused. Is that proportional? We're not discussing perpetration of abuse; we're discussing whether 2017-02 is fit for purpose. Nick
- 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 ]