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] Re: Interaction between the RIPE and anti-abuse communities]
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Re: Interaction between the RIPE and anti-abuse communities]
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] RIPE assignment-size attribute
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Suresh Ramasubramanian
ops.lists at gmail.com
Fri Feb 4 09:50:17 CET 2011
That is only useful if the organization doing so has some sort of oversight or escalation power over what the receiver of those complaints is supposed to do. It might actually make sense to involve the dutch CERT in this. On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 2:16 PM, Alessandro Vesely <vesely at tana.it> wrote: > > Agreed, especially if the procedure provides for handing complaints to > external abuse teams, e.g. according to IP allocations. -- Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.lists at gmail.com)
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Re: Interaction between the RIPE and anti-abuse communities]
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] RIPE assignment-size attribute
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]