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

However, I fully understand that the community prefer to do things in different steps.

We initially asked for the abuse mailbox.

Then we added a technical validation.

Now I'm asking for a better validations and make sure that the reporting is feasible. I'm not asking to verify if you handle the abuse case or not.

*AND* I'm not asking to take *new* actions. There are existing procedures for that in extreme cases.
 

El 30/4/20 9:51, "anti-abuse-wg en nombre de Serge Droz via anti-abuse-wg" <anti-abuse-wg-bounces at ripe.net en nombre de anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net> escribió:

    I do not disagree with this.

    Serge


    On 30.04.20 09:41, Hans-Martin Mosner wrote:
    > Am 30.04.20 um 02:58 schrieb Suresh Ramasubramanian:
    >>
    >> However, being in a fiduciary role - with IPv4 being traded like
    >> currency these days the description fits - RIPE NCC can’t not get
    >> involved.
    >>
    > ...
    >> NCC owes it to the rest of its membership and the internet community
    >> at large to take a more active role in this matter.
    >>
    > This.
    > 
    > And as long as RIPE and/or NCC explicitly does not want to take action
    > when RIPE members don't handle abuse from their networks properly, the
    > whole issue of validating abuse mailbox addresses is moot. After all
    > discussion, the toothless compromise will be that there should be an
    > abuse mailbox, and FWIW it can be handled by Dave Null because nobody
    > will exert pressure on the resource holder to do anything else.
    > 
    > Our problem on the receiving side of network abuse is not with the few
    > good-willing but technically challenged providers whose abuse mailbox
    > isn't working properly but with those large operators who don't give a
    > flying f about their customer's network abuse.
    > 
    > Personally, I consider the anti-abuse WG a failure at this point. When I
    > joined I had hoped to see and possibly support constructive work towards
    > a reduction in network abuse, but apparently there are big players in
    > this game who are not interested in such a reduction as it would
    > undermine their "business".
    > 
    > Cheers,
    > Hans-Martin
    > 

    -- 
    Dr. Serge Droz
    Chair of the FIRST Board of Directors
    https://www.first.org




**********************************************
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.