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

Hi,

On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 06:29:32AM +0200, ac wrote:
> > Folks, the process we have in the RIPE region for abuse contact
> > validation is the result of a *consensus based process* that happend
> > *in this working group*.
> > Before you all argue for "we need to have more paperwork!" please take
> > a step back and explain a) what is wrong with the current validation
> > process, and b) why this proposal would improve this.
> > Gert Doering
> >         -- NetMaster
> 
> because, IRL (in real life) things do not remain "static"

This is why we do (already!) verify abuse-c: reachability today.

In a lightweight process that came out as consensus out of this
very WG.

[..]
> your very forceful and multiple emails arguing very hard against and
> all your emails, attacking each and every +1 simply serves to
> illustrate that you really want to enforce your opinion on the group
> in this regard.
> 
> So, again, I ask: Why not propose to remove the abuse contact resource
> completely? Is this where you are going with your very strong and
> continuing and ongoing objections?

No.  Abuse-contacts are useful.  We do validate them today for 
technical reachability.

This is fully sufficient to notice technical brokenness.  It is not
sufficient to enforce actual abuse *handling*, but neither is the
proposed policy change.

Do not put words in my mouth, I'm perfectly able to do that myself.

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
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/anti-abuse-wg/attachments/20190523/b548df1c/attachment.sig>