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

In message <alpine.LRH.2.21.1904171644150.13524 at gauntlet.corp.fccn.pt>,
Carlos Friaças via anti-abuse-wg <anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net> writes

>So, the main/only course of action, as i see it today for an hijacked 
>party (if the hijacker is from the RIPE region), is sending a complaint to 
>a dutch court... and it's doubtful if the dutch court will not rule 
>itself to be "unable to rule" on the matter...

You are entirely incorrect that using the courts is the "main" or "only"
course of action.

Numerous hijack events have been dealt with down the years. I am not
aware of any instance in which a court got involved in stopping the
hijack from happening ...

... I am aware of peer pressure (literally), action by IXPs, action by
organisations providing reputation scores and even action by hosting
companies.

>However, yes, there are hijacks originating from the region, and there 
>isn't an easy way for anyone to report it, so hijacks (or persistent 
>hijackers) are stopped.

hijacks are reported in numerous places, the NANOG mailing list springs
immediately to mind -- and posting there is certainly easy

>Trying to sum it up in just a line:
>"Persistent and intentional resource hijacking is not tolerated."

I'm still looking forward to the wording that will deal with the US DoD

-- 
richard                                                   Richard Clayton

Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary 
Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. Benjamin Franklin 11 Nov 1755
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 185 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/anti-abuse-wg/attachments/20190418/b0a46510/attachment.sig>