[anti-abuse-wg] objection to RIPE policy proposal 2016-01

Not aiming at Michele...

On 05/03/16 11:54, Michele Neylon - Blacknight wrote:

> The issue isn’t that simple. Prior to the introduction of abuse-c
> people would try to contact whatever contact they could find.

The abuse-c as an operational information is certainly useful. The
technical implementation is certainly not as useful as it could be (and
I side completely with Gert here). But I continue to disapprove the
mandatory nature of the abuse-c, it is not helpful, on the edge of
counterproductive: the willing will have them anyway. The unwilling will
put anything in that passes the syntax test. And as a reporter, I prefer
a clear "I don't care" over wasting my time on an ignored report.

So advertising the abuse-c actively: yes, sure. Mandatory: no. Thus
changing policy in regard to ERX: no (besides, that's poor form, cf
Peter Koch's comment).

And by all means make the 'more specific' work.

Gilles

-- 
Fondation RESTENA - DNS-LU
2, avenue de l'Université
LU-4365 Esch-sur-Alzette
tel: +352.4244091
fax: +352.422473