[anti-abuse-wg] 2010-08 New Policy Proposal (Abuse contact information)

>>>> The next step that will happen, or is already happening is that ISPs are
>>>> using the reputation data you are talking about to block, for example
>>>> email, which is a pretty good idea in my opinion. "As long as you do not
>>>> offer a address where I can complain about your traffic I do not want
>>>> your traffic."
>>>
>>> I don't see this happening; ever. Large impact triggered by a way too
>>> low metric.
>>
>> Some ISPs in Europe are already using this as a greylisting reason.
> 
> And that is a problem, Tobias. You are using words like "some" or "We
> are receiving several request about such a reputation list every week."
> These are no facts which we can check.

I fully understand. Okay so I try to stop talking about things you are
not able to prove. Sorry for that.

But nevertheless the existence or the non-existence of an object will
never be able to judge about the things Leo Vegoda mentioned. It is not
an indicator if abuse handling is taken serious if there is an IRT
Object or not.

Thanks,

Tobias

abusix.org



-------------- 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/20101110/7fd4abf3/attachment.sig>