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] RIPE NCC Abuse Complaints, Audits and Reports
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] RIPE NCC Abuse Complaints, Audits and Reports
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] RIPE NCC Abuse Complaints, Audits and Reports
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Suresh Ramasubramanian
ops.lists at gmail.com
Thu Aug 18 03:32:32 CEST 2011
I'd actually support a form (and maybe also a word / rtf doc with questions, for those who reach out over email) with a detailed questionnaire that helps you ask the most important questions you need to determine whether an audit should be carried out. --srs On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 11:29 PM, Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet <Woeber at cc.univie.ac.at> wrote: > > I am not proposing to abandon or to replace "abuse at ripe.net", because it > probably does serve a valid purpose, within the fremawork of the assumed > semantics (as Peter has pointed out already!), > but rather to create a sort of formal complaints process against an LIR. -- Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.lists at gmail.com)
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] RIPE NCC Abuse Complaints, Audits and Reports
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] RIPE NCC Abuse Complaints, Audits and Reports
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]