[anti-abuse-wg] 2019-03 New Policy Proposal (BGP Hijacking is a RIPE Policy Violation)

On Mon, Apr 01, 2019 at 05:06:37PM +0100, Carlos Friaas via anti-abuse-wg wrote:
>The same way it happens with lack of payment,

explicitly part of the contract (SSA).

> or delivering false/forged information to the NCC.

explicitly part of the contract.

You are trying to change the contract. You can't do that here.


>>with, i.e. punishment by withdrawal of resources.
>
>It shouldn't be their decision, it should be the experts' decision.

It gets better. By *what* authority does your expert get to
decide that a LIR should be punished? Deo gratias? 
It can't be a contractual obligation, I have no damn contract
with some expert...

>It's possibly my fault, but (in this long thread) i still fail to read 
>from someone that hijacking is not offensive, and thus it should be 
>tolerated by the community. I understand you are trying to take this 
>into a grey area by comparison with other examples/abuse.

It is quite possible to find "hijacking" offensive and yet to
oppose a dangerous and totalitarian policy. 


rgds,
SL