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

Hi Leo
 


El 14/1/20 0:11, "Leo Vegoda" <leo at vegoda.org> escribió:

    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.
  
This is not handled by this proposal. The existing policy already mandates that:

https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2017-02

  
    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.
 
Even if I think that the operators MUST process abuse cases, if the community thinks otherwise, I'm happy to support those two options in the proposal. For example, an autoresponder in the abuse-c mailbox for those that don't intend to process the abuse cases to option 2 above?

   
    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.
    
No, I don't think so, but I'm happy to modify the text if it looks like that.





**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.theipv6company.com
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.