[anti-abuse-wg] update on netsecdb project

> 
> Frank,

Hi again,

> > I just discribed one arround launch time.
> > RIPE should urged all members to stop spam originating from their networks.
> 
> You did not describe a silver bullet.  The RIPE community has urged 
> their members to stop spam and abuse for years, RIPE-409 says it quite 
> plainly, this has been the repeated advice.  There are potential ways of 

Advise is very different to forcing members to do something and
to have sanctions, right ?

It looks like that "advice" did not change anything.

I might be that it helped for long term members, but I guess here
that those members finaly understood themself, that they block
their own business, if they do nothing.

Newer members arent so far, and any "advise" will not changed that for years.
A change in the RIPEs regulations WILL change something very quickly ...
Thats what we should work for.

(still waiting on a discussion of the system I discribed arround lunch time)

> enforcing this, but please do not claim that what has been discussed so 
> far today will suddenly stop network abuse.

Well, I see it from my perspective.
Developing a own dnsbl basing on the spam our customers receive
reduced the problem for us to nearly nothing, but this was hard work
and still needs ajustments and further development to keep up
with the spammers newest technologies.

Adapting this expirience and the expirience from all members
for the whole RIPE region and developing regulations for all
members cannot be so complicated ...

There is just no will from most members, because it means work.
Who will vote for a regulation that ends up in work ?

> >>> Usally there are to many ideas resulting in at least something to do.
> >>
> >> And many things have been discussed, and often solutions suggested.  It
> >
> > Not on the list.
> 
> And the minutes of each meeting are posted to the list.  So far no 
> discussion has come out of them.

Sure, most interested members will not intend meetings (because
they have to fight against the Spam arriving out of the networks
from attendees *** sorry *** had to make this joke).

It would be much more productive and generate more consensus,
if the points would be discussed on the list BEFORE the meeting.

> >> is up to people to implement those suggestions or to make proposals to
> >> the RIPE community and perhaps ask the NCC to undertake a task.  In
> >> addition, as we discussed in Lisbon and as we will be discussing again
> >> in Prague, the two chairs of the WG have been working with the NCC and
> >> international law enforcement to look at ways of furthering cooperation
> >
> > goverments ?
> > this will make all worse and slower ...
> 
> The aim is to get governments and LEAs onside, to examine policies and 

Might be your aim, this was not discussed on the list.

Germany talkes now for about 2 years about an introduction
of general Internet blocking systems (mostly because of
sex crimes), this is absolutely not productive.
Germany already has weird regulations for mail control
to fight against spam.

Goverments have no technical background at all and neither
have the so-called experts the pay for advise.

> procedures at RIR level and to avoid the making of necessary legislation 
> and to keep the bottom up consensus approach.  However there is no way 

Forget, how do you think that there will be a world-wide consensus
in Goverments ? That does not happen in the EU and will never.

> that governments will not be involved, the idea is to take their input 
> and show them we, as a community, are acting.

Weird starting point, goverments have no idea, what the Internet is ...

> >> We're trying to finalise the agenda at the moment, but the work that is
> >> taking place with the NCC, the RIPE community and the LEAs will be
> >
> > Well, please post it to the list, so that it can be discussed before
> > its finalized.
> 
> I will post an agenda, but I'm not sure what discussion there is likely 
> to be as my two calls for agenda items have, so far, met with one single 
> response.  Equally, the agenda of any WG is reasonably mutable and on 

Well, maybe there will be more ideas coming ...

> occasion has been finalised an hour or so before the meeting, so there 
> will be plenty of time for discussion.
> 
> >> playing a major part.  I hope to have a first draft by the end of this
> >> week.  Obviously if any proposals are brought to the WG before the
> >> meeting on Thursday 6th, discussion time for them will be allocated on
> >> the agenda.
> >
> > All this should happen all on the list, not everybody can attend meetings.
> 
> Apologies, I should have been clearer.  As has been stated elsewhere 
> and, I believe, on this list, while policy proposals will, undoubtedly, 
> be discussed at meetings, the primary place to discuss policy is the WG 
> mailing list and there is no intention or plan to purely discuss things 
> at meetings.

Then I somehow really missed detailed discussion, I counted about
100 mails during the last year ...


Kind regards, Frank
--
PHADE Software - PowerWeb                       http://www.powerweb.de
Inh. Dipl.-Inform. Frank Gadegast             mailto:frank at powerweb.de
Schinkelstrasse 17                                fon: +49 33200 52920
14558 Nuthetal OT Rehbruecke, Germany             fax: +49 33200 52921
======================================================================
Public PGP Key available for frank at powerweb.de

> 
> Brian.
>