[anti-abuse-wg] working in new version of 2019-04 (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")

On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 1:50 PM JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via anti-abuse-wg
<anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net> wrote:

[...]

> I will love to have in the policy that they must be investigated and acted upon, but what I heard from the inputs in previous versions is that having that in policy is too much and no way to reach consensus …

I don't understand the value of requiring organizations who do not
intend to investigate abuse reports to spend resources publishing an
address from which they can acknowledge the reports - only to then
delete those reports without doing anything.

It creates hope for reporters and wastes the RIPE NCC's and the
reporters' resources by forcing unwilling organizations to spend
cycles on unproductive activity.

Why not give networks two options?

1. Publish a reliable method for people to submit abuse reports - and act on it
2. Publish a statement to the effect that the network operator does
not act on abuse reports

This would save lots of wasted effort and give everyone more reliable
information about the proportion of networks/operators who will and
won't act on abuse reports.

There might be some value in having the RIPE NCC cooperate with
networks who want help checking that their abuse-c is working. But
this proposal seems to move the RIPE NCC from the role of a helpful
coordinator towards that of an investigator and judge.