[anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 New Policy Proposal (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")

Hi Agree with this policy, all management and membership need more tight
policies.
The relation from Ripe with everyone it's to loosy, my vote to every rule
that bring more responsibility to members.
Like in every country any region, rules are important to avoid abuses. Exist
lots of organizations that abuse because the lack of policies, rules and
consequences.




-----Original Message-----
From: anti-abuse-wg [mailto:anti-abuse-wg-bounces at ripe.net] On Behalf Of
Nick Hilliard
Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2019 22:39 PM
To: Gert Doering <gert at space.net>
Cc: anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 New Policy Proposal (Validation of
"abuse-mailbox")

Gert Doering wrote on 16/05/2019 21:47:
> No positive effect, but lots of negative side-effects.

Abuse mailboxes are already checked.  What matters for abuse management is
whether reports are acted on.  This policy doesn't address that.

If the RIPE NCC is instructed to send 6-monthly reminders to all abuse
contacts with the implicit threat that if they aren't acted on in the way
specified in this policy, that the organisation in question can look forward
to having their addressing resources vapourised, this will aggravate the
RIPE NCC membership and corrode community trust in the organisation.  The
one thing it won't do is make abuse management better.

Internet abuse management is not something that you're going to fix by
beating LIRs with sticks, and if they don't react, that you threaten to beat
them harder.

Separate to this, it's inappropriate to micromanage the NCC in RIPE policy.
It would be good if the RIPE working groups stopped trying to tell the RIPE
NCC people how to do their jobs.

Nick