[anti-abuse-wg] anti-abuse-wg Digest, Vol 12, Issue 16

Not currently members of M3AAWG however Emailvision (6bn + email messages per month) also supports this proposal
+1 from me personally

best


Andrew Bonar 
Deliverability Director
Emailvision

-----Original Message-----
From: anti-abuse-wg-bounces at ripe.net [mailto:anti-abuse-wg-bounces at ripe.net] On Behalf Of Suresh Ramasubramanian
Sent: 20 August 2012 13:01
To: Wout de Natris
Cc: anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] anti-abuse-wg Digest, Vol 12, Issue 16

+1 to what Wout said.  Based on the M3AAWG endorsement of this
proposal, it has support from the largest ISPs and messaging providers from around the world.

+1 to the proposal from me personally.

--srs

On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 6:20 PM, Wout de Natris <denatrisconsult at hotmail.nl> wrote:
> Brian,
>
> From my side a full support for the proposal. Without any obligations 
> the proposal may never work as foreseen.
>
> And I would like to stress that Jerry Upton wrote on behalf of M3AAWG 
> and in function as director, so representing the M3AAWG members. 
> Looking at who those members are, I venture to see this as a very 
> large support on behalf of the proposal.
>
> Best,
>
> Wout
>
>> From: anti-abuse-wg-request at ripe.net
>> Subject: anti-abuse-wg Digest, Vol 12, Issue 16
>> To: anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net
>> Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 12:00:02 +0200
>>
>> Send anti-abuse-wg mailing list submissions to anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit 
>> https://www.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to 
>> anti-abuse-wg-request at ripe.net
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at 
>> anti-abuse-wg-owner at ripe.net
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific 
>> than "Re: Contents of anti-abuse-wg digest..."
>>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>> 1. 2011-06 Move to Last Call (Abuse Contact Management in the RIPE 
>> NCC Database) (Brian Nisbet)
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> -
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 08:55:07 +0100
>> From: Brian Nisbet <brian.nisbet at heanet.ie>
>> Subject: [anti-abuse-wg] 2011-06 Move to Last Call (Abuse Contact 
>> Management in the RIPE NCC Database)
>> To: anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net
>> Message-ID: <5031ED5B.6090905 at heanet.ie>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>>
>> Colleagues,
>>
>> RIPE Proposal 2011-06 (Abuse Contact Management in the RIPE NCC
>> Database) has reached the end of its extended Review Phase and a 
>> decision must now be made regarding the next steps. I (Tobias, as the 
>> main proposer, has, as agreed & discussed stepped back from his 
>> co-chair duties on this one) have gone through the various mails and 
>> discussions from the the review phase, a short summary of which is below.
>>
>> I feel that the main thrust of the discussion on 2011-06 gave support 
>> to the proposal.
>>
>> The initial discussion phase lead to a redrafting of the proposal and 
>> some questions over the mandatory nature of the attribute and the 
>> future of the IRTs. It was also clarified that while there may be 
>> further output from the ACM-TF and/or further proposals in this 
>> space, 2011-06 was considered to be standalone.
>>
>> The second version was published on 16th April 2012, addressing, I 
>> believe, a number of points raised during the initial discussion phase.
>> Some objections remained, such as opinions on the mandatory nature of 
>> the object and the lack of a wider plan.
>>
>> In May 2012 it was decided to go ahead and move the proposal to 
>> Review Phase, during which the RIPE NCC presented their impact 
>> analysis. This gave rise to discussion regarding the future of the 
>> IRT object. I believe that it has been clarified that while the NCC 
>> will put plans in place to deal with the decommissioning of the IRT 
>> object, they will, of course, only do so if the community proposes 
>> this. They have acknowledged that 2011-06 does not contain this 
>> proposal and so no action regarding the IRT object will be taken on foot of this proposal.
>> I believe that the wider IRT community are happy with this.
>>
>> There was relatively little discussion during Review Phase, so it was 
>> extended for a further four weeks. During this time a number of 
>> objections were restated (mandatory nature and data protection 
>> issues) and discussed and a few new expressions of support were made.
>>
>> Overall it appears that there are three sustained objections to the 
>> proposal and twelve clear expressions of support. The opinion of some 
>> members of the list (who have commented) is unclear, however I feel 
>> there is sufficient consensus to move this proposal to Last Call.
>>
>> Emilio will made the formal announcement from the RIPE NCC PDO.
>>
>> If you disagree with this interpretation, please let me know.
>>
>> Brian
>> Co-Chair, Anti-Abuse WG
>>
>>
>>
>> End of anti-abuse-wg Digest, Vol 12, Issue 16
>> *********************************************



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