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] [db-wg] objection to RIPE policy proposal 2016-01
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] [db-wg] objection to RIPE policy proposal 2016-01
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] [db-wg] objection to RIPE policy proposal 2016-01
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
denis
ripedenis at yahoo.co.uk
Thu Mar 3 04:14:18 CET 2016
On 03/03/2016 01:44, Randy Bush wrote: >> If you put an address that does not handle abuse in abuse-c: you >> have just inserted incorrect data into the database. IMO that >> should not be the job of the NCC... > > if you force folk to put in abuse-c, there will be non-responsive > email addresses. get over it. As long as you know it is the email address intended to receive abuse complaints, if there is no response that in itself is a statement from the network manager. cheers denis >
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] [db-wg] objection to RIPE policy proposal 2016-01
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] [db-wg] objection to RIPE policy proposal 2016-01
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]