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/anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net/
[anti-abuse-wg] 2019-03 and over-reach
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-03 and over-reach
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-03 and over-reach
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Ronald F. Guilmette
rfg at tristatelogic.com
Mon Mar 25 19:12:31 CET 2019
In message <20190325122413.GQ99066 at cilantro.c4inet.net>, "Sascha Luck [ml]" <aawg at c4inet.net> wrote: >Unfortunately, RIPE and the NCC were founded in much more >cooperative days and so it was omitted to clearly define the >"limits of authority", perhaps because it was not seen as >necessary back then. I am pleased, at long last, to find that there is at least one thing that Sasha Luck and I agree on, and he has nicely summarized it above. >I therefore argue that it is maybe time to have a discussion on >what exactly RIPE and the NCC should be and what, if any, limits >on their administrative power there should be. Arguably, that has been the subtext of this discussion on 2019-03. >I hope, though, that everyone can at least agree that *this* is >*not* the forum for that discussion. On that point, we will have to continue to agree to disagree. Regards, rfg
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-03 and over-reach
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-03 and over-reach
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]