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

> On 07-Mar-2016, at 5:44 PM, Niall O'Reilly <niall.oreilly at ucd.ie> wrote:
> 
>  I think Peter Koch, Gert Doering, and Gilles Massen have answered this question adequately already.

Gert followed a rather socratic method - answering a question with another :)

The current method is absolutely not useful in that the lack of standardization means people (including me) who are stuck with large amounts of phish to report have no other alternative but do a substantial part of the process manually.

—srs

Quoting Gert - 

> The relevant question for the PDP is "does 2016-01 help achieve the goal of
> better combatting Internet abuse"?
> 
> [..]
>> I don't know why we are making the policy side so complicated. The 
>> principle is simple. If you manage IP addresses in the public domain, 
>> from where abuse can be generated, responsible management requires you 
>> to provide abuse contact details!!!
> 
> Will making "providing a mail address in a specific field" mandatory for
> people the RIPE NCC doesn't currently have a contract with (and that do
> not particularily frequently show up on the "evil boys list") help 
> achieve your goals?  Why?