[anti-abuse-wg] 2017-02 New Policy Proposal (Regular abuse-c Validation)

Hi,

On Fri, Oct 06, 2017 at 08:54:14AM +0200, ox wrote:
> +++++
> requiring abuse email (RR data) to be valid and functional is a very
> basic tenet (as it relates to morality and ethics as well as RR "goals")
> +++++

True.  This is the goal, and I share that.

But I'm sceptic on whether the particular proposal on the table will do
much to actually achieve this goal where change is needed - while at
the same time imposing extra work on those that already do the right 
thing.

> > We can force people to have abuse mailboxes that trigger a response if
> > a mail from the RIPE NCC is received.
> > 
> this is perfectly fine, imnsho, as it indicates receipt of
> communications, even if it is autoresponded.
> 
> it just cannot autorespond: that this is a non monitored mailbox - as
> by definition, in this proposal, it has to be functional. 
> 
> functional implies that it can receive and respond to communications
> and is not a "black hole" or dev/null

So, what have we achieved if there is someone who will personally reply to
verification mails from the RIPE NCC, and throw away everything else?

Yes, Mails will no longer bounce.  Good.

But will it magically make those networks not interested in handling
abuse mails more interested in them?  No.

So, where's the gain in the larger picture "fight against abuse"?

[..]
> > Thus, ambivalence on the policy.
> 
> is this a good thing? please reconsider your ambivalence? all it takes
> is for a few good people....(Edmond Burke...)

I see no positive effect.  So I find it hard to support it.

The negative effects are limited.  So I find it hard to oppose it.

Ambivalence.

Gert Doering
        -- NetMaster
-- 
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG                        Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14          Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen                   HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444           USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/anti-abuse-wg/attachments/20171006/568bc26a/attachment.sig>