This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 Review Phase (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 Review Phase (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 Review Phase (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Petrit Hasani
phasani at ripe.net
Mon Jul 20 19:46:30 CEST 2020
Hello Nick, The financial cost approximation of a proposal is not part of the Impact Analysis and the Policy Development Process, so we have not made a calculation. As too many factors have to be taken into account that we can't estimate realistically at this stage of the PDP. I would like to clarify a couple of details that whilst re-editing the Impact Analysis seem to have become less clear. I am sorry about it: - We estimate 10 times the amount of workload that is currently spent on abuse-c validation, not 10 times the amount of workload of the whole Registration Services Department. - It is not that the RIPE NCC is deciding not to enforce parts of the policy, it is our understanding that this is not required. It is the RIPE NCC’s understanding that the proposal does not require the validation process to check for violations such as ““abuse-mailbox:” attributes” which force the sender to use a form. Kind regards, -- Petrit Hasani Policy Officer RIPE NCC > On 20 Jul 2020, at 16:34, Nick Hilliard <nick at foobar.org> wrote: > > Petrit Hasani wrote on 20/07/2020 14:07: >> As per the RIPE Policy Development Process (PDP), the purpose of this >> four week Review Phase is to continue discussion of the proposal, >> taking the impact analysis into consideration, and to review the full >> draft RIPE Policy Document. > This is the second most damning impact analysis I've seen the RIPE NCC write about any proposal, after 2019-03. > > The takeaways are roughly this: > > - up to 10x the number of tickets annually > - ~10x the current number of staff required to handle the workload > - the NCC will not enforce parts of the policy > - ~3 months of retooling required > > Would it be possible for someone in the RIPE NCC to provide a reasonable cost estimate for hiring the 10x number of Registration Services personnel for the first 12 months of operation? A back-of-the-envelope calculation suggests that this will run into multiples of millions of €. > > Nick -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 833 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP URL: </ripe/mail/archives/anti-abuse-wg/attachments/20200720/8a54bcff/attachment.sig>
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 Review Phase (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 Review Phase (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]