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

In message <14BEE352-AC12-43A4-86D2-6F1426253C8D at consulintel.es>, 
JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet at consulintel.es> wrote:

>Of course, unless there is a court order. However, I really can't believe
>that in most of our countries a judge will allow a court order for a massive
>hijack affecting many people and organizations, unless there is an emergency
>risk for the population, and this is done in those cases by declaring a
>"national emergency situation".

I think you have missed my point rather entirely, and also you may perhaps
be unaware of history.  Governments and courts in specific countries and
jurisdictions may not always do things that the majority of us would think
of as being "approporiate".

    https://www.cnet.com/news/how-pakistan-knocked-youtube-offline-and-how-to-make-sure-it-never-happens-again/

      "Kim Davies, ICANN's manager of route zone services, says ICANN isn't able to
      revoke the AS number of a misbehaving network provider."

So I ask again:  Does the RIPE community REALLY want to give carte blanche to every
little tin-pot small-time government official in *every* country of europe to do
perfectly stupid and harmful things, such as the thing that is documented in the
news story above?

Because that's what you are all doing right now.  By failing to say, clearly, that
hijacking is against policy, you are effectively endorsing and supporting and
allowing it.


Regards,
rfg