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

On Fri, 17 May 2019, Gert Doering wrote:

(...)
>>> Why do we need more process?
>>
>> We might not need more processes, but hopefully improved processes :-)
>
> There is no indication that the complications Jordi is proposing are
> an actual improvement in any metric, except "human life time wasted".

Hi,

Starting with "complications" is really not that constructive.

If the process is too complex let's work on it, and make it simpler where 
it is possible.

Trying to build a softer approach, maybe the NCC doesn't need to send 
_everyone_ a message twice a year, but if someone finds an abuse-mailbox 
to be unresponsive, then if it is mandatory to have a working 
contact/mailbox, the NCC could only get into the picture when someone 
detects that is not in place.

Or is _that_ already in place...?


Regards,
Carlos


> Gert Doering
>        -- NetMaster
> -- 
> have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?
>
> SpaceNet AG                      Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer
> Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14        Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
> D-80807 Muenchen                 HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
> Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444         USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
>