Re: Commecial vs fairness (was: spam support)
- Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2002 14:15:01 +0000 (GMT)
On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, Mally Mclane wrote:
> For RIPE to police ISPs on *their own* AUP, and investigate if they are
> actually breaking *their own* AUP would be a huge task, and one I think
> would be beyond the capabilities, man power wise, of RIPE at the moment.
That's why it would be simpler and more feasible to have a generic AUP
that covers basic requirements such as responding to abuse/spam complaints
within certain time, applying appropriate border filters, not knownly
hosting kiddie porn, etc.
I know that enforcing even a basic AUP is beyond RIPE's capabilities at
the moment, but the extra resources can be found with a mixture of
governmental sponsorship (as the internet is now an intrinsic part of any
country's comms infrastructure) and slightly increased LIR fees. If RIPE
has over 3000 LIRs on their books, then increasing the fee by 200 euros
would give them over e600,000. It shouldn't be difficult to get EU
funding to match this.
> It also opens up all manner of legal/operational issues, which I am sure
> RIPE would rather not get involved in.
I'm sure they wouldn't, but the problem is that times have changed. The
days when you could rely on an AS admin/technical contact to care about
the traffic that was originated from their network are gone. There needs
to be a central organisation that will act if the network provider will
not. RIPE is, by far, the best placed organisation to fill this role.
Setting up a new organisation to deal with this would not only be more
costly, but also would duplicate a lot of the work that RIPE are already
doing.
> Above all, I don't think this fits easily into the remit the RIPE NCC
> has.
Not it's current remit, no. Remits can be changed if there is sufficient
demand for it from the RIPE membership.
Regards,
Rich
