[anti-abuse-wg] Decision on Proposal 2017-02
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Decision on Proposal 2017-02
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Decision on Proposal 2017-02
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Brian Nisbet
brian.nisbet at heanet.ie
Tue Mar 27 14:50:13 CEST 2018
Alexander, Thanks for this. I'd just like to clarify something, are you objecting wholly to this proposal because you would prefer stronger/more complex checks? In that you feel it doesn't go far enough? Thanks, Brian Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG Brian Nisbet Network Operations Manager HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network 1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland +35316609040 brian.nisbet at heanet.ie www.heanet.ie Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270 > -----Original Message----- > From: anti-abuse-wg [mailto:anti-abuse-wg-bounces at ripe.net] On Behalf Of > Alexander Isavnin > Sent: 27 March 2018 13:46 > To: anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net > Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Decision on Proposal 2017-02 > > Dear Brian, colleagues! > > I would like to remind about one of my objections: > This policy will not seriously improve data quality, because it allows to check > only one field in database. > If one wants really to improve data quality by automated checks, more > complicated policy should be developed. > > Also, may i suggest to run "the method by which they(NCC) would plan to > implement this proposal" once, to display current situation with abuse-c in > database? > > Kind regards, > Alexander Isavnin > > Sent via RIPE Forum -- https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/forum
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Decision on Proposal 2017-02
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Decision on Proposal 2017-02
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]