[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 ]
Randy Bush
randy at psg.com
Mon Mar 7 16:49:20 CET 2016
> In the absence of an abuse contact mailbox attached to address > registration data, can you make some constructive suggestions about > how a recipient of internet abuse can get in contact with the people > who manage the address block and who, by implication, are likely to > have some form of contractual relationship with whoever is instigating > the abuse? i am not against having an abuse-c: field. i am against making it mandatory. all that'll get us is black holes. rady
- 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 ]