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

On Sat, Mar 23, 2019 at 10:33 PM Ronald F. Guilmette
<rfg at tristatelogic.com> wrote:
> >2. OTOH the ultimate result (membership cancellation) may be seen as a
> >very heavy punishment.
>
> Did you have some particular alternative in mind that you wanted to propose?

Yes, the message you're replying to featured the word "suspension".

> Sending the miscreant hijacker to bed without supper perhaps?

This line of characters is a pathetic statement which carries no
additional useful information, please refrain from doing that again.

> I do believe that the main idea here was *not* to have the nuclear missles
> on a hair-trigger *or* to launch them within a few minutes of the beginning
> of a hijacking event

Me too, what's the point?

> but rather [the main idea here was] to *notify* the party responsible, and
> then, if and ONLY IF absolutely NO ACTION is taken to resolve the problem
> after some reasonable period of time, then, and only then, it would
> *begin* to be a real possibility that sanctions would be applied.

This is not stated in the text. I don't care what's the "main idea"
was wherever and whenever it was. Either it's in the text or it's
absent, and that's it.

> Believe me, none of the sponsors or proponents of this proposal wants to
> see the nuclear missles launched mistakenly, for example, in response to
> a falling meteor or a volcanic eruption somewhere.

This line of characters is a pathetic statement which carries no
additional useful information, please refrain from doing that again.

--
Töma