[db-wg] [anti-abuse-wg] objection to RIPE policy proposal 2016-01
- Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] [anti-abuse-wg] objection to RIPE policy proposal 2016-01
- Next message (by thread): [db-wg] [anti-abuse-wg] objection to RIPE policy proposal 2016-01
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
andre at ox.co.za
andre at ox.co.za
Thu Mar 3 11:56:05 CET 2016
On Thu, 03 Mar 2016 19:35:49 +0900 Randy Bush <randy at psg.com> wrote: > >> it would be a convenience to me for you to send me €1000/mo, and i > >> am sure many other sould line up. let's make it mandatory. > > can we agree to leave the straw men out of this discussion? They're > > not helping. > no. even you seem to confuse what is necessary for the ncc to > maintain a rigorously correct resource allocation registry and what > is convenient for operators. > i understamd the former being mandatory. while i occasionally find a > good abuse-c: useful, it is not my prerogative to mandate that another > operator have one for my convenience. > the ncc's job is a rigorous registry, not a convenience store for ops. > randy it is actually very simple: any rigorously correct resource allocation registry data must include accurate abuse records. otherwise it is hardly: a rigorously correct resource allocation registry but more: just a sort of a correct resource allocation registry
- Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] [anti-abuse-wg] objection to RIPE policy proposal 2016-01
- Next message (by thread): [db-wg] [anti-abuse-wg] objection to RIPE policy proposal 2016-01
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ db-wg Archives ]