[anti-abuse-wg] On +1s and Policy Awareness AND Astro... something...
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] On +1s and Policy Awareness AND Astro... something...
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] On +1s and Policy Awareness AND Astro... something...
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Sascha Luck [ml]
aawg at c4inet.net
Fri Apr 5 14:51:44 CEST 2019
On Fri, Apr 05, 2019 at 06:07:48PM +0530, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: >Right. You don't agree with it. So "we all" don't agree with it. Excellent reasoning there. I *do* agree that the NCC should not get involved in routing or content matters. I dispute the statement that *everyone* agrees with that. I apologise if I didn't make this clear enough. I will endeavour to use even shorter words next time. rgds, SL > >On 05/04/19, 5:44 PM, "anti-abuse-wg on behalf of Sascha Luck [ml]" <anti-abuse-wg-bounces at ripe.net on behalf of aawg at c4inet.net> wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 04, 2019 at 06:41:52PM -0700, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote: > >RIPE can't tell anyone either what to announce (over BGP) much less what > >the individual IP addresses that people do announce are used for, which > >could include, and which often *does* include, the distribution of malware > >and also innumerable other unsavory and illegal activities. None of that > >is, or rightly should be any of RIPE's concern. On that I think we all > >agree. > > This argument actually deserves a rebuttal. > > 1) I'm not convinced "we all agree" on that. At least where > content is concerned, that discussion has already been had, in > this very place. With much similar arguments. While it ultimately > led to nothing, i don't remember any universal agreement. > > 2) Why *not*? It is precisely what 2019-03 attempts to do: it > empowers the NCC to regulate in an area where it has no mandate > (Routing) with the argument that RIPE-"regulated" resources are > involved. It follows logically that this extends to any other use > of RIPE-"regulated" resources. Including who can advertise what > to whom by which means and to which end. All it takes is another > bright idea once that door is open. > > >As regards to what RIPE members are paying for, unless I have totally > >misunderstood, the members are paying for the -orderly- distribution and > >registration of number resources. Hijacking quite clearly flies in the > >face of that desired order, and if left unchecked, results in the very > >opposite of order, i.e. chaos. Such activity therefore cannot be either > >condoned nor even tolerated by the dues paying members if they are in > >fact to get the very thing that they are paying for, order over chaos. > > The debate as to what function the NCC should have can and should > be had. However, not here. This is something that I firmly > believe the paying membership AND NOBODY ELSE should decide. > > As for comparing RIPE NCC with Twitter, that 'argument, is so > blatantly ridiculous that I don't think it even deserves a > response. > > rgds, > SL > > > >
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] On +1s and Policy Awareness AND Astro... something...
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] On +1s and Policy Awareness AND Astro... something...
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]