[anti-abuse-wg] 2017-02: what does it achieve?

Richard Clayton wrote:
> #1 people who set the email address to  nowhere at example.com
> 
> #2 people who set the email address to  nowhere at unregistereddomain.com
> 
> #3 people who used to own unregistereddomain.com but forgot that email
> addresses are using that domain in a RIPE object
> 
> #4 people whose company used to use abuse at brandA.com but have moved to
> abuse at brandB.com and now brandA.com is a black hole because the
> forwarding doesn't work on the new server
> 
> #5 people whose mail system is just broken
> 
> #6 people who host their email at Google think that Google will deliver
> email to an abuse desk even when that email contains bad URLs
> 
> oops, I think the proposal doesn't cover #6 and should! because I see
> this on a regular basis
> 
> Nevertheless, it's surely some improvement if RIPE detects when abuse
> contact details are unintentionally broken....  but testing once a year
> for that (rather than every couple of months) doesn't seem to be
> sufficiently often to me.

Wouldn't using the existing ARC process work for #1-#4?

Nick