[anti-abuse-wg] Reporting Fraud

Hi,

>>> There's no webform for this, no, but if you email ncc at ripe.net
>>> and/or abuse at ripe.net, this should get things to the right
>>> person and it can go from there.
>>
>> Given the number of cases I've reported to RIPE, and the apparent
>> inaction, I'm not convinced that either of those would be a viable
>> communications channel.  Perhaps we do need a webform.  No doubt
>> the RIPE NCC will protest that since there isn't a policy that tells
>> them to actually do anything about such cases, there's no point us
>> having a webform anyway.
> 
> Hummm... OK.  I didn't realize things were that bad.

It is! ;-)

> So, ah, maybe the Right Place To Start would be for somebody (perhaps
> even this working group?) to propose at least some sort of a policy
> (e.g. on hijacked ASNs and/or address blocks) for RIPE's consideration (?)
> 
> I do agree that in the absence of any policy to even investigate, a web
> form for submissions isn't going to help a lot.

I have done a policy proposal for APNIC which was discussed in the last
meeting, but didn't find consensus. See more about this here:
http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-084

I think we should change that a bit and say: "RIPE is responsible to
keep up accuracy for the data held in the whois database!" The means
that RIPE has to find ways to do so.

The above mentioned proposal by the way is in a similar way in process
at ARIN.

If this working group thinks the policy proposal would be nice for RIPE,
let me know and I will make the needed changes.

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/20100928/515c6f30/attachment.sig>