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

Sorry – two sets of impacts

1. Impact on NCC staff’s time – ok, impact assessment
2. How many ASNs are we talking about here and can they be aggregated under some specific upstream providers?

I am sure an impact assessment would work – my point was that a lot of the criticism so far has been jumping to conclusions over the impact.

On 14/09/17, 3:03 PM, "Brian Nisbet" <brian.nisbet at heanet.ie> wrote:

    Suresh,
    
    This information will be part of the NCC's Impact Assessment, which is
    supplied at the end of the initial discussion phase. The first phase is
    around the proposal itself and whether the community feels it has merit
    in and of itself.
    
    All of the pieces are required for the whole that is the PDP, but impact
    on the NCC isn't he focus right now.
    
    Thanks,
    
    Brian
    Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG
    
    Brian Nisbet
    Network Operations Manager
    HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
    1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
    +35316609040 brian.nisbet at heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
    Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270
    
    On 13/09/2017 12:29, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
    > As a rough indication of the impact, how many ASNs are going to be
    > affected by this move?  Has any study been made on the number of ASNs
    > with such invalid contact information in abuse-c, and are they
    > concentrated anywhere in particular such as on specific ISPs?
    > 
    >  
    > 
    > If the objections to this proposal were not made on philosophical
    > grounds, and made with loud protestations that the impact on RIPE NCC
    > staffing resources would be too great, without actually making such
    > assessments and seeing the data on who would actually be negatively
    > impacted by this proposal ..
    > 
    >  
    > 
    > TL;DR – what data do we have available?
    > 
    >  
    > 
    > --srs
    > 
    >  
    > 
    > *From: *anti-abuse-wg <anti-abuse-wg-bounces at ripe.net> on behalf of
    > Andreas Worbs <anw at artfiles.de>
    > *Organization: *Artfiles New Media GmbH
    > *Date: *Wednesday, 13 September 2017 at 3:52 PM
    > *To: *<anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net>
    > *Subject: *Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2017-02 New Policy Proposal (Regular
    > abuse-c Validation)
    > 
    >  
    > 
    > I support this proposal, it's a good step in the right direction. Valid
    > contact (incl abuse-c) information is necessary for such a database.
    > 
    > Also a validation of the abuse-c should be made with the resource
    > registration for new resources.
    > 
    > Furthermore i don't know why some guys think a resource will be
    > deregistered right after the resource is tagged as invalid. The proposal
    > is obviuos
    > 
    >     /In cases where the “abuse-mailbox:” contact attribute is invalid,
    >     the RIPE NCC will follow up with the resource holder and attempt to
    >     correct the issue./
    > 
    > So there are some more steps before it will be deregistered, so cool down.
    > 
    >  
    > 
    > Am 07.09.17 um 13:59 schrieb Marco Schmidt:
    > 
    >     Dear colleagues,
    > 
    >      
    > 
    >     A new RIPE Policy proposal, 2017-02, "Regular abuse-c Validation", is now available for discussion.
    > 
    >      
    > 
    >     The goal of this proposal is to give the RIPE NCC a mandate to regularly validate "abuse-c:" information
    > 
    >     and to follow up in cases where contact information is found to be invalid.
    > 
    >      
    > 
    >     You can find the full proposal at:
    > 
    >     https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2017-02
    > 
    >      
    > 
    >     As per the RIPE Policy Development Process (PDP), the purpose of this four-week Discussion Phase
    > 
    >     is to discuss the proposal and provide feedback to the proposer.
    > 
    >      
    > 
    >     At the end of the Discussion Phase, the proposer, with the agreement of the RIPE Working Group Chairs,
    > 
    >     decides how to proceed with the proposal.
    > 
    >      
    > 
    >     We encourage you to review this proposal and send your comments to
    > 
    >     <anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net> <mailto:anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net> before 6 October 2017.
    > 
    >      
    > 
    >     Kind regards,
    > 
    >      
    > 
    >     Marco Schmidt
    > 
    >     Policy Development Officer
    > 
    >     RIPE NCC
    > 
    >      
    > 
    >     Sent via RIPE Forum -- https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/forum
    > 
    >      
    > 
    > 
    > 
    > -- 
    > 
    > Kind regards
    > 
    >  
    > 
    > Artfiles New Media GmbH
    > 
    >  
    > 
    > Andreas Worbs
    > 
    >  
    > 
    >  
    > 
    > Artfiles New Media GmbH | Zirkusweg 1 | 20359 Hamburg
    > 
    > Tel: 040 - 32 02 72 90 | Fax: 040 - 32 02 72 95
    > 
    > E-Mail: support at artfiles.de <mailto:support at artfiles.de> | Web: http://www.artfiles.de
    > 
    > Geschäftsführer: Harald Oltmanns | Tim Evers
    > 
    > Eingetragen im Handelsregister Hamburg - HRB 81478
    >