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

Well if it's a fundamental right to do business, and someone can't do
business because their network is subject to a DDoS or their communication
medium (email) is spammed by someone from a network where the network
operator "ignores" abuse emails, and has to spend money sorting through
spam emails, then this policy promotes so called "business rights"

----

On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 2:22 AM 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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/anti-abuse-wg/attachments/20200430/e5b8718e/attachment.html>