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/[email protected]/
[anti-abuse-wg] 2011-06 Discussion Period extended until 7 May 2012 (Abuse Contact Management in the RIPE NCC Database)
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Some (old) numbers about the quality of contact information, was 2011-06 Discussion Period extended until 7 May 2012 (Abuse Contact Management in the RIPE NCC Database)
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] 2011-06 Discussion Period extended until 7 May 2012 (Abuse Contact Management in the RIPE NCC Database)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Michele Neylon :: Blacknight
michele at blacknight.ie
Tue Apr 17 11:09:43 CEST 2012
Brian One of my fears is that if you introduce an abuse-c without any obligation to maintain then RIPE will be the target for a lot of criticism Regards Michele On 17 Apr 2012, at 09:09, Brian Nisbet wrote: > Leo, > > Leo Vegoda wrote, On 17/04/2012 00:22: >> Hi Denis, >> >> On Apr 16, 2012, at 2:32 pm, Denis Walker wrote: >> >>> I am not aware of any formal big picture, but I follow the mailing list >>> as closely as I am sure you and many others do. As you will know many of >>> these issues invoke much discussion on the list. >> >> I think we only get one opportunity to do this right. Doing it without a strategy that's been agreed by the whole community seems quite scary. > > While I think that Frank has given a good outline, what is "this" to your mind? > > Is it abuse contact management, is it data verification? Part of the problem that we hit with the ACM-TF is that data verification is a very big thing and people have a lot of reactions to it. This lead to a decision to try to get the abuse-c nailed down and integrated, before, should the community or TF decide, looking at data verification, and indeed the scope of that. > > I'll be honest, I don't see the 2011-06 and any data verification proposal as being that tightly integrated, but I'll accept not everyone shares my view of the world, so if you could expand on your fears, or why you feel it is so vital, that would be great. > > Thanks, > > Brian. > Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions ♞ Hosting & Colocation, Brand Protection ICANN Accredited Registrar http://www.blacknight.com/ http://blog.blacknight.com/ http://blacknight.biz http://mneylon.tel Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 US: 213-233-1612 Locall: 1850 929 929 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Facebook: http://fb.me/blacknight Twitter: http://twitter.com/mneylon ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland Company No.: 370845
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Some (old) numbers about the quality of contact information, was 2011-06 Discussion Period extended until 7 May 2012 (Abuse Contact Management in the RIPE NCC Database)
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] 2011-06 Discussion Period extended until 7 May 2012 (Abuse Contact Management in the RIPE NCC Database)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]