[anti-abuse-wg] New Abuse Regulations

Jørgen Hovland wrote:
> Den 6/28/13 10:50 AM, skrev Frank Gadegast:
>> Sascha Luck wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 09:47:35AM +0200, Frank Gadegast wrote:
>>>> What about a RIR regulation to ensure that address space is only
>>>> used for purposes not harming anybody ?
>>>> That resource holders are responsible for the abuse coming
>>>> out of their networks ?
>>>
>>> Srsly? Abandon the common-carrier principle for the sake of a minor
>>> annoyance like *spam*? Forcing ISPs to censor and surveil all traffic
>>
>> Sure, its a matter we should discuss, how far we like
>> to push things.
>
> I find it disturbing that anyone would even consider regulating IP
> allocations based on abuse just because they don't have a good enough

Well, everybody is free to have his own opinion.
I dont see this.
I you get a "lend" of something you should be carefull with it.

> spamfilter themselves.

Thats a stupid estimation.
abuse has not only something to do with spam ...

> I would rather see a regulation that would deny
> address space allocation to LIRs not having a good spamfilter.

Honest ?
Well, describe how this could work and we discuss it here.
If a majority likes it ...

>> For a start I would like to force resource holders to actually
>> read the mail arriving under their abuse address.
>> This will not force anybody to control all the traffic.
>
>
> Do you believe this is practically possible for any huge email provider
> (or other services) ?

Sure, how many abuse reports are beeing send during a day.
Does anybody has a number or a good estimation ?

>
>
>> F.e. by returning ticket numbers or the like.
>> Or sending automatic CCs to the RIPE NCC ..
>> This could be controlled, weighted and analyzed by the NCC
>> and could give evidence about how the ISP is working
>> with abuse reports.
>
>
> Or even better; RIPE NCC could just get a login to PRISM and read all
> your mail there.
>
>
>  > Others have probably other ideas, lets hear and discuss them.
>
>
> Accepting your abuse mail is not a right, but a service.

Good point.

> This may be
> unfortunate, but it should be up to each LIR to decide if and through
> what media they accept complaints. Creating a standard and encourage all
> LIRs to use it would however be great.

You see ?

Currently the abuse-c will be the only practical way to get in contact.
You can send letters, drive-by, a fax, whatever, but the addresses
are probably worse than the abuse-c's email address.
So there is no real descision to make wich way is best to contact them.

The current regulations at RIPE now say in fact, that you can only get
(or keep) your resources when you have an abuse-c
Its only another step to enhance the regulations that you need to
read email coming in.


Kind regards, Frank






>
>
>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>