[anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 Discussion Phase (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")

Is there anything that stops NCC from doing additional due diligence
such as validating abuse issues along with the invalid contact
information etc, before taking such a decision?

On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 9:52 PM Nick Hilliard <nick at foobar.org> wrote:
>
> Serge Droz via anti-abuse-wg wrote on 29/04/2020 16:55:
> > So, it's the security guys, saying
> >
> >    This may help a bit, but won't solve all problems.
> >
> > versus the infrastructure operators saying
> >
> >    Beware! This it creating huge costs and will not help at all, and
> > answering two mails a year will be our ruin.
>
> The root problem is that the policy proposes to use the RIPE NCC to
> enforce abuse management processes.
>
> The specifics in this iteration of the document are to threaten and then
> act to deregister an organisation's number resources - and thereby
> remove their ability to conduct business - if the organisation declines
> to handle abuse complaints over email.
>
> To be clear, it's a fundamental right in large chunks of the RIPE
> service region to conduct business.  If the RIPE NCC acts to threaten to
> remove this ability to conduct business, there would need to be sound
> legal justification for doing so.
>
> Nick
>


-- 
Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.lists at gmail.com)