This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net/
[anti-abuse-wg] Abuse Contact Information - Policy Proposal
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Abuse Contact Information - Policy Proposal
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Abuse Contact Information - Policy Proposal
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Tobias Knecht
tk at abusix.com
Mon Jul 26 08:29:15 CEST 2010
Hi, >> The next step is a policy proposal that does the following things: >> >> - Introduce the IRT Object into ASN Objects. >> - Make the abuse-mailbox attribute mandatory for the IRT Objects. >> - Make IRT Objects mandatory for directly by RIPE delegated Ranges. > > So why are you not going to propose that under PDP? Because I think a Best Practice Paper is easier to find consensus. But you are absolutely right there has to be a policy proposal in future. And there will be one. ;-) Thanks, Tobias -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 262 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: </ripe/mail/archives/anti-abuse-wg/attachments/20100726/3b82c3c7/attachment.sig>
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Abuse Contact Information - Policy Proposal
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Abuse Contact Information - Policy Proposal
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]