[anti-abuse-wg] Draft Anti-Abuse WG Minutes ? RIPE 61

On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 10:54 PM, Brian Nisbet <brian.nisbet at heanet.ie> wrote:
> The RIPE NCC service region, and the region from which most of the community
> originates, comprises of some 78 countries with widely varying laws and
> cultures.  It is an extremely interesting region in which to work and while
> I would not for one moment suggest that we can do nothing, not even close,
> it is a very important point to remember in any anti-abuse conversation.

This is a valid point and that's why I'm glad to see Wout de Natris,
Uwe Rasmussen and others who do have a background in international
regulatory policy and law enforcement involved in this and related
RIPE WGs.

My only point is that far more could be done - and this should have
been done far earlier to avoid the tensions generated so far, with
active and informed people from other groups with the same focus
having to vent their frustration in this manner.  Richard, and before
that Andy Auld of SOCA, who I admit could have made his point more
diplomatically.

Auld said -

> ""If we were being harsh, we could say that Ripe has received criminal
> funds and was involved in money-laundering offences. We are not treating
> it that way, but you could see it like that."

Correct in that the the front organization was the RBN, and that the
funds were criminal.  Also correct that RIPE the RIR did not know
either of these facts and had clean hands.  And correct that in a
different situation than this, the organization receiving the funds
would be liable to prosecution.

I still can't help wondering what effect believing a bit less in the
"we are not the (routing|internet|document) police" mantra would have
had on policy enforcement.

-- 
Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.lists at gmail.com)