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] National PSDN "UZPAK"
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] National PSDN "UZPAK"
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] National PSDN "UZPAK"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Florian Weimer
fw at deneb.enyo.de
Mon Mar 26 18:45:57 CEST 2012
* Reza Farzan: > If your statement--Email contact information is optional, is correct, how do > people contact a network regarding the abuse violations that were originated > from their IP address? > By calling them? Or, writing a letter using the postal service? This is > simply ridiculous. Usually, you don't care about contact, you want them to take some sort of action as well. > RIPE must create a revised policy regarding e-mail contact for networks > listing within RIPE database to ensure accountability. There is no relationship between the two, one way or the other. All PA resources can be traced back to a legal entity which has submitted proof of its existence to RIPE NCC. For PI resources, the status is less clear, but I can't tell if this is an issue in practice. And there are countries (curiously, not the ones you would expect) where forming a limited liability company is so easy and cheap that accountability is seriously impacted.
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] National PSDN "UZPAK"
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] National PSDN "UZPAK"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]