This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[anti-abuse-wg] 2019-03 New Policy Proposal (BGP Hijacking is a RIPE Policy Violation)
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-03 New Policy Proposal (BGP Hijacking is a RIPE Policy Violation)
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-03 New Policy Proposal (BGP Hijacking is a RIPE Policy Violation)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
ac
ac at main.me
Wed Mar 20 09:29:26 CET 2019
On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 10:15:06 +0200 (IST) Hank Nussbacher <hank at efes.iucc.ac.il> wrote: > I think we have different expections from criminals. I view the > criminals as ones who analyze every RFC and every standard to > determine where they can be abused or manipulated for their benefit. > A sanction that would be implemented 18 months later would allow the > evil LIR enough time to sell their resources to some other LIR such > that they would not lose such resources. > -Hank > +1 see this with many other types of abuse for example email abuse: DKIM means nothing (is a complete waste of time) and SPF is useless (unless the TXT contains an "-") etc etc. > > people care, and playing havoc with BGP (intentional or > > accidentially) has hardly any consequences at all. > > > > OTOH, these are the questions that make me undecided on the > > proposal :-) > > +1 > > Gert Doering > > -- NetMaster > > >
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-03 New Policy Proposal (BGP Hijacking is a RIPE Policy Violation)
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-03 New Policy Proposal (BGP Hijacking is a RIPE Policy Violation)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]