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] Hijack Factory: AS201640 / AS200002
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Hijack Factory: AS201640 / AS200002
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Hijack Factory: AS201640 / AS200002
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Sascha Luck
lists-ripe at c4inet.net
Sat Nov 8 00:31:23 CET 2014
On Thu, Nov 06, 2014 at 07:35:28PM -0800, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote: >in such contracts, perhaps along with some language that makes it clear >that _willful_ violations will be prosecuted to the full extent of the >law (as contract fraud). I'm pretty certain, most members do *not* want higher fees in order to prosecute dead-horse lawsuits. Besides, an ASN is not some bit of magic that only a RIR can create, it is a simple number and one can pick any of them and advertise networks through it. Having it registered merely increases the likelihood that an upstream will route it... rgds, Sascha Luck
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Hijack Factory: AS201640 / AS200002
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Hijack Factory: AS201640 / AS200002
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]